Re: [Chicken-hackers] What's left for the next release?

[Peter Bex]

On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 11:20:36AM +0200, Christian Kellermann wrote:
> Dear Chicken hackers,
> dear Felix,
> dear Ivan,
> 
> since I will be able to hack more on chicken again on the next
> weekends I would like to focus my energy on clearing the way for a new
> release.  I tend to trip over a new unnoticed can of worms, so I would
> like to ask you for:
> 
> * Bugs that you think should be fixed for 4.8.0
> * Patches that need review for 4.8.0

The following threads are still unresolved:

Apr 11 Sven Hartrumpf  (1.1K) [Chicken-hackers] -O5 vs. -optimize-level 5
Apr 10 Timo Myyrä      (1.7K) [Chicken-hackers] Patch to use better PRNG on 
BSD's
Apr 07 To chicken-hack (7.5K) [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Adding checks to some 
procedures that accept integers only
Mar 16 Felix           (2.5K) [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] check egg names in 
setup-download
Mar 08 Alaric Snell-Py (2.9K) [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Allow assert to accept 
an arbitrary expression as the message

> * Documentation that needs a closer look (manual merges with the wiki?)
> * Needed features or tests...
> 
> I have seen there are some bugs on trac with the milestone set to
> 4.8.0. Do you consider these essential or is that outdated?

Personally I think #808 should definitely be fixed, unless we plan to
do the next release in a shorter timespan than a year.
#723 sounds serious as well, and I think #800 can be fixed too; we've
already pinpointed where it fails.  #816 isn't very critical but it
sounds like it shouldn't be too hard to fix.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
                                                        -- Donald Knuth