This ticket is created to track the release of Darcs 2.0. Other bugs or features
that are blocking the release can associated as "superceders". When those are
all resolved, the release should happen. 

Based on the bug tracker activity, my sense is that Darcs 2 is already better
than 1.0.9, with no significant regressions that I'm aware of. 

I'm adding issue648 as a superceder to start with, which refers to strange
"rmfile" entries appearing in "whatsnew" after a pull.

On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 05:56:52PM -0000, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> Based on the bug tracker activity, my sense is that Darcs 2 is already better
> than 1.0.9, with no significant regressions that I'm aware of. 

Another major regression is the slowdown of record when adding many
files, which was recently reported (off bug-tracker) by Zooko.
-- 
David Roundy
Department of Physics
Oregon State University

I nominate issue579 to be fixed for the Darcs 2 release. The issue title is:

 Darcs2: "changes" shows revised history

Adding issue568 as a dependency. It's apparent regression in the unstable branch
with the title of "wrong report of "Skipped 6 patches due to dependencies".

Adding new recommended dependency: disabling "bytestring" by default for now to
avoid bus errors.

Hi Don,

> bus errors using bytestring by default? Has the cause of this been
> identified?

It's an error I got trying to apply a patch which was darcs sent from
a Windows box

  http://bugs.darcs.net/issue697

The repository is the wxhaskell one (actually the patch has already
been applied, so you'll have to unpull it to see this in action)

Nominating bug with pre-gzipped files as something to look into before the Darcs
2 release. That's issue673.

I'm nominating issue585 to be addressed for the Darcs 2 to be released. This is
a bug in convert where "flattening mergers changes the dependency structure and
can make old tags inaccessible."

bugs:
> 
> 
> Adding new recommended dependency: disabling "bytestring" by default for now to
> avoid bus errors.
> 

bus errors using bytestring by default? Has the cause of this been
identified?

I'm assigning this bug to myself, just so it's easier for me to see what's
listed here.  I appreciate the work you've been doing Mark on marking bugs as
release-critical in this way.  And would appreciate similar work by others!

David

I decided I don't like using "Superseder" to track dependencies for release,
because there's not way to see a report of all of these tickets, so we can
easily review what they are, and what the status is. So instead I'm tagging all
of the issues with the "FixForDarcs20" tag, so we can make such a report.

Here's the report I made for the Darcs 2 release-critical issues. I used the
feature to save it so it appears in "Your Queries" in the sidebar. 

It shows that 2 of the 7 items on the list are resolved now. 

http://bugs.darcs.net/issue?@columns=title,id,activity,status,assignedto&@sort=status&@group=priority&@filter=topic&@pagesize=50&@startwith=0&topic=24&@dispname=Fix%20For%20Darcs%202.0

     Mark

Mark Stosberg wrote:
> 
> Here's the report I made for the Darcs 2 release-critical issues. I used the
> feature to save it so it appears in "Your Queries" in the sidebar. 
> 
> It shows that 2 of the 7 items on the list are resolved now. 
> 
> http://bugs.darcs.net/issue?@columns=title,id,activity,status,assignedto&@sort=status&@group=priority&@filter=topic&@pagesize=50&@startwith=0&topic=24&@dispname=Fix%20For%20Darcs%202.0

How about 699?  Unless I'm doing something completely bogus (don't think 
so), darcs2 has developed a new performance problem recently.

What's the status of the bytestring support?  I believe it has a nasty 
problem with filenames containing spaces, but I'm stuck testing that due to 
issue 699.  Maybe if someone has a spare moment they could play around with 
some filenames with spaces in and see if they can provoke any problems - 
just a 'darcs check' was enough to show a problem for me, and 'darcs 
repair' left me with a corrupt repository.

Cheers,
	Simon

On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 10:57:55AM +0000, Simon Marlow wrote:
> Mark Stosberg wrote:
> >
> >Here's the report I made for the Darcs 2 release-critical issues. I used
> >the feature to save it so it appears in "Your Queries" in the sidebar.
> >
> >It shows that 2 of the 7 items on the list are resolved now. 
> >
> >http://bugs.darcs.net/issue?@columns=title,id,activity,status,assignedto&@sort=status&@group=priority&@filter=topic&@pagesize=50&@startwith=0&topic=24&@dispname=Fix%20For%20Darcs%202.0
> 
> How about 699?  Unless I'm doing something completely bogus (don't think 
> so), darcs2 has developed a new performance problem recently.

That's an important one.  I've been stalled for a couple of days trying to
fix 672 (the one where I get the weird ExitFailure 127 from runProcess),
which is also release-critical.

> What's the status of the bytestring support?  I believe it has a nasty 
> problem with filenames containing spaces, but I'm stuck testing that due to 
> issue 699.  Maybe if someone has a spare moment they could play around with 
> some filenames with spaces in and see if they can provoke any problems - 
> just a 'darcs check' was enough to show a problem for me, and 'darcs 
> repair' left me with a corrupt repository.

I haven't tried bytestring support myself.  For now, I'm leaving that for
others to test and debug, since I've got more bug reports than I can handle
apart from that feature (which could always be disabled).
-- 
David Roundy
Department of Physics
Oregon State University

On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 03:42:42AM -0000, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> I decided I don't like using "Superseder" to track dependencies for release,
> because there's not way to see a report of all of these tickets, so we can
> easily review what they are, and what the status is. So instead I'm tagging all
> of the issues with the "FixForDarcs20" tag, so we can make such a report.

Okay.  How about a simple ReleaseCritical tag, which we could reuse for
later releases? In that case, we could add the "Show release critical"
search to everyone's tracker view (and not feel that after release we need
to remove it).
-- 
David Roundy
Department of Physics
Oregon State University

> How about 699 [darcs2 cannot check the ghc-darcs repository] ?  Unless I'm doing something completely bogus (don't think 
> so), darcs2 has developed a new performance problem recently.

In the sense that it looks like a regression, it's a candidate.

    Mark

David Roundy wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 03:42:42AM -0000, Mark Stosberg wrote:
>> I decided I don't like using "Superseder" to track dependencies for release,
>> because there's not way to see a report of all of these tickets, so we can
>> easily review what they are, and what the status is. So instead I'm tagging all
>> of the issues with the "FixForDarcs20" tag, so we can make such a report.
> 
> Okay.  How about a simple ReleaseCritical tag, which we could reuse for
> later releases? In that case, we could add the "Show release critical"
> search to everyone's tracker view (and not feel that after release we need
> to remove it).

I thought of that, but our Roundup has a limitation of only really being 
able to search for one "Topic" at a time.

So while searching of "ReleaseCritical" and "Darcs20" might be ideal, it 
isn't practical.

I suppose "ReleaseCritical" would work as long as there was only one 
release being prepared at a time. Considering there are currently sort 
of two (1.1 and 2.0), this case may well come up again.

I'm going to leave things alone for now with "FixForDarcs20" in place, 
but if someone wants to change it further, I'll go along with it.

    Mark

Darcs 2 was released on 2008-04-07.  Congrats! [closing]