[translations] Re: 2.20.0 release coordination with translation. Other showstoppers?

[David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx>]

"Phil Holmes" <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Kastrup" <dak@xxxxxxx>
> To: "Federico Bruni" <fede@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <lilypond-devel@xxxxxxx>; <translations@xxxxxxxxxxx>; "Phil
> Holmes" <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2020 10:54 PM
> Subject: Re: 2.20.0 release coordination with translation. Other
> showstoppers?
>>
>> One interesting consideration is that the VERSION file upon release
>> should look like
>>
>> PACKAGE_NAME=LilyPond
>> MAJOR_VERSION=2
>> MINOR_VERSION=20
>> PATCH_LEVEL=0
>> MY_PATCH_LEVEL=
>> VERSION_STABLE=2.20.0
>> VERSION_DEVEL=2.20.0
>>
>> basically announcing the same versions as stable and unstable since
>> 2.20.0 will both be the latest stable release as well as the latest
>> release altogether.  Things will normalise once we get a followup
>> unstable release.
>>
>> I seem to remember that if we declared VERSION_DEVEL to point to a yet
>> unreleased 2.21.0, the links would essentially end up dead.
>>
>> So there are little quirks like that accompanying a stable release that
>> might cause followup work.  So "last day of weekend" sounds only
>> sensible if Phil is not considerably unavailable afterwards.
>>
>> -- David Kastrup
>> My replies have a tendency to cause friction.  To help mitigating
>> damage, feel free to forward problematic posts to me adding a subject
>> like "timeout 1d" (for a suggested timeout of 1 day) or "offensive".
>
>
> I am generally available for the next few weeks.  I would think it
> better to wait a few days to get the translations stable, since it
> will take me a little while to get my head round what's needed for a
> new stable release.
>
> I think that VERSION_DEVEL will need to be 2.19.84 for this release,
> otherwise we won't have any links to "development" documentation.

But it doesn't make sense to point VERSION_DEVEL to documentation that
is actually older than that of 2.20, does it?

I do not really know what is correct here with respect to our
semi-automatic webpage update mechanism.  I just remember that we had
problems last time round.

-- 
David Kastrup