[cairo] Plans for release of 1.10.2

[Andrea Canciani]

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 16:16:54 +0200, Siarhei Siamashka <siarhei.siamashka at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Friday 19 November 2010 14:44:17 M Joonas Pihlaja wrote:
>> > On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Kieran McCusker wrote:
>> > > I know it's pointless but my manager was wondering if there are any
>> > > approximate timescales for this point release?
>> >
>> > Are there any particular bugs you'd like to see fixed in 1.10.2?
>>
>> This one looks bad enough to me:
>> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/cairo/commit/?h=1.10&id=91a6fe64236985d30f5794d760698deafd9e6511
>>
>> There are also some other fixes accumulated in 1.10 git branch.
>
> Right, we have more than enough important fixes already on the branch to
> have merited a stable release long ago. It just needs a couple of hours to
> check if there are no other patches that should also be on the stable
> branch and then to do some sanity checking of the test results.
>
> If there are any candidates for 1.10 now is the time to either push them
> or nominate them here. And I will make the release on Monday.

Two fixes for the build system that I think should be in:
d51ab091422fc64831578bffb3a502c83ec8bdf5
6dda9c4465fa229f3fe9927e8318121642b41c14

and if we want to enable cairo-trace on DragonFly:
2b3d9b3a3aedc37481639dff923c97b8ff956c80

A (minor) fix for path construction that we might want in as well:
0655198301ec60b387b581a10b991ee442743374

Licensing of files we ship (I don't know if we want it in 1.10, but
it is obvious it would not break anything and it's probably correct
to state the license for files we release):
147fa7a2bea74bfc02059d99df72b998d45eb843

I would like get-path-extents to be fixed as per
ac7b2a972097f4080ab6e5a29974c830b8b57a4f, but this would
mean that it will have to be marked as XFAIL unless some major changes
are made to the path code. Jeff Muizelaar fixed one case in:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/cairo/commit/?h=1.10&id=e9bb70d2dee4ef7a54e3971f09a08df30c2b5287
but this commit is not sufficient to correct all extents computations (as
pointed out in the "XXX" comments).

There have been multiple fixes for experimental backends that we
might want to merge in master. I would expecially like:
f20814e07e7032c14f273d712f35e19addfdae80
b53084b7c530ed0473137ee8ebfab70fdd8e3c23
because they fix compilation and potentially invalid memory accesses
(respectively).

You might want to merge some of the xcb patches Uli Schlachter wrote,
but I'm confident that you know better than me which one should go
in 1.10 (maybe crasher bugs/wrong asserts?) and which should not.

Andrea

PS: To me it's still not completely clear what should go in 1.10.2.
I suppose that build fixes and security/stability fixes have priority,
but is this true both for supported and for experimental backends?