From ellie at fastmail.com Sun Feb 2 20:06:18 2020 From: ellie at fastmail.com (ellie timoney) Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2020 12:06:18 +1100 Subject: feature freeze on master until Feb 3 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6a84227a-0295-432f-b7fd-19bdb88fb325@www.fastmail.com> Hi, The cyrus-imapd-3.2 branch now exists (with initial tag for 3.2.0-beta0). Any new work that needs to be in 3.2 needs to be on this branch. The master branch now has a 3.3.0-dev0 tag, so from now on builds from master will version themselves as "3.3..." rather than "3.1..." You can now merge big things to master again :) The website documentation should finish building shortly. For now, the top level website is still a copy of the /3.0 tree, and does not know about 3.2. Once there is a real stable release of 3.2, I'll change top level website to be a copy of /3.2. The /3.2 and /dev trees both know about 3.2.0-beta0 and 3.3.0-dev0 I plan to cut a beta1 of 3.2.0 later this week (which might be "later this afternoon", idk yet) The "latest dev release" is still 3.1.9 and will remain so until we do a proper "3.3.0". I've yet to fix up the github labels, will get on that after lunch. Travis CI knows about 3.2 and seems to be building it correctly :) Cheers, ellie On Wed, Jan 15, 2020, at 10:55 AM, ellie timoney wrote: > Hi, > > I plan on branching off a new cyrus-imapd-3.2 branch at the start of > February (probably on the 3rd), so I can start making beta releases in > preparation for an eventual real release in March (hopefully!). > > In the meantime, if you have big, risky branches that should not be in > the 3.2 release, please hold off on merging them to master for a little > longer. Once 3.2 diverges from master, you can go hog wild ;) > > I'm about to re-audit the > https://github.com/cyrusimap/cyrus-imapd/labels/3.2 label for what's > actually feasible to include, and untag the rest. I will probably need > to ask some of you about some of these, for code areas I don't know. > I'd appreciate prompt responses. :) > > Cheers, > > ellie > From quanah at symas.com Tue Feb 18 12:36:31 2020 From: quanah at symas.com (Quanah Gibson-Mount) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 09:36:31 -0800 Subject: Best practices for cyrus-sasl development Message-ID: <4D5C5F42F1F8C83FE4E9BB79@[192.168.1.144]> Hello, I'm starting to go through the issues queue and pending pull requests, and would like to start merging in some fixes. However, I'd like to know what procedure(s) etc should be followed, if they exist. Also, I have questions on the overall state of the git repo. There is a cyrus-sasl-2.1 branch that seems to have not been touched since 2011. It appears that cyrus-sasl-2.1.27 was cut off of the master branch? This seems like an odd development path, I would have expected 2.1.27 to come from the 2.1 release branch generally. Can anyone provide information on what the intention is with the repo? Should all work simply be done against master, and all releases cut from it? Should the 2.1 release branch be caught up with master and then used for releases after that point? Thanks, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: From murch at fastmail.com Tue Feb 18 12:59:19 2020 From: murch at fastmail.com (Ken Murchison) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:59:19 -0500 Subject: Best practices for cyrus-sasl development In-Reply-To: <4D5C5F42F1F8C83FE4E9BB79@[192.168.1.144]> References: <4D5C5F42F1F8C83FE4E9BB79@[192.168.1.144]> Message-ID: <613297ba-db36-87ba-9dee-e67ebb7c49ac@fastmail.com> I can tell you that 2.1.27 was built from master.? The 2.1 branch might have been created in anticipation of master becoming the dev branch for 2.2, but I don't know that for certain. I have just forwarded an email that was sent regarding Cyrus IMAPd release process to this list for discussion. On 2/18/20 12:36 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: > Hello, > > I'm starting to go through the issues queue and pending pull requests, > and would like to start merging in some fixes.? However, I'd like to > know what procedure(s) etc should be followed, if they exist.? Also, I > have questions on the overall state of the git repo. > > There is a cyrus-sasl-2.1 branch that seems to have not been touched > since 2011.? It appears that cyrus-sasl-2.1.27 was cut off of the > master branch? > > This seems like an odd development path, I would have expected 2.1.27 > to come from the 2.1 release branch generally. > > Can anyone provide information on what the intention is with the repo? > Should all work simply be done against master, and all releases cut > from it?? Should the 2.1 release branch be caught up with master and > then used for releases after that point? > > Thanks, > Quanah > > -- > > Quanah Gibson-Mount > Product Architect > Symas Corporation > Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: > -- Ken Murchison Cyrus Development Team Fastmail US LLC From quanah at symas.com Tue Feb 18 13:42:59 2020 From: quanah at symas.com (Quanah Gibson-Mount) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 10:42:59 -0800 Subject: Best practices for cyrus-sasl development In-Reply-To: <613297ba-db36-87ba-9dee-e67ebb7c49ac@fastmail.com> References: <4D5C5F42F1F8C83FE4E9BB79@[192.168.1.144]> <613297ba-db36-87ba-9dee-e67ebb7c49ac@fastmail.com> Message-ID: <6749B75365AA971714F5DE8A@[192.168.1.144]> --On Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:59 PM -0500 Ken Murchison wrote: > I can tell you that 2.1.27 was built from master.? The 2.1 branch might > have been created in anticipation of master becoming the dev branch for > 2.2, but I don't know that for certain. Looking at the branches in git, I don't think the 2.1 branch was created for 2.2 development. In fact, looking at the git history, you can see that the cyrus-sasl-2.1 branch was used for creating releases in the 2.1 series up until 2.1.25: commit 89173b72832d668f74d820bd19d9b66f3578cf21 (tag: cyrus-sasl-2.1.25) Author: Ken Murchison Date: Wed Sep 7 16:09:40 2011 +0000 Fixed 3 memory leaks in SCRAM However, the two releases after that point abandoned the 2.1 release branch for unknown reasons. It is of course quite common for there to be a release branch and then have master be the development branch. I'm unclear why the cyrus-sasl project veered away from this. This generally leaves me unsure of where to go forward here. I personally am not fond of cutting releases off of development branches. Do we want to sync the 2.1 branch up with master, and then go back to using it for releases, and keeping master for development (and potentially cut a 2.2 branch from it at some point, assuming there's ever that level of devlopment) ? Do we just abandoned the idea of having a release branch and future feature development, and use master for everything? etc. Regards, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: From murch at fastmail.com Tue Feb 18 13:45:10 2020 From: murch at fastmail.com (Ken Murchison) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 13:45:10 -0500 Subject: Best practices for cyrus-sasl development In-Reply-To: <6749B75365AA971714F5DE8A@[192.168.1.144]> References: <4D5C5F42F1F8C83FE4E9BB79@[192.168.1.144]> <613297ba-db36-87ba-9dee-e67ebb7c49ac@fastmail.com> <6749B75365AA971714F5DE8A@[192.168.1.144]> Message-ID: <96aab659-8e8d-3ae6-a05d-38bff6e35219@fastmail.com> I agree that we should sync 2.1 with master and use it for future 2.1 releases and use master fir development. On 2/18/20 1:42 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: > > > --On Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:59 PM -0500 Ken Murchison > wrote: > >> I can tell you that 2.1.27 was built from master.? The 2.1 branch might >> have been created in anticipation of master becoming the dev branch for >> 2.2, but I don't know that for certain. > > Looking at the branches in git, I don't think the 2.1 branch was > created for 2.2 development.? In fact, looking at the git history, you > can see that the cyrus-sasl-2.1 branch was used for creating releases > in the 2.1 series up until 2.1.25: > > commit 89173b72832d668f74d820bd19d9b66f3578cf21 (tag: cyrus-sasl-2.1.25) > Author: Ken Murchison > Date:?? Wed Sep 7 16:09:40 2011 +0000 > > ?? Fixed 3 memory leaks in SCRAM > > > However, the two releases after that point abandoned the 2.1 release > branch for unknown reasons.? It is of course quite common for there to > be a release branch and then have master be the development branch.? > I'm unclear why the cyrus-sasl project veered away from this. > > This generally leaves me unsure of where to go forward here.? I > personally am not fond of cutting releases off of development > branches.? Do we want to sync the 2.1 branch up with master, and then > go back to using it for releases, and keeping master for development > (and potentially cut a 2.2 branch from it at some point, assuming > there's ever that level of devlopment) ?? Do we just abandoned the > idea of having a release branch and future feature development, and > use master for everything? etc. > > Regards, > Quanah > > > -- > > Quanah Gibson-Mount > Product Architect > Symas Corporation > Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: > -- Ken Murchison Cyrus Development Team Fastmail US LLC From quanah at symas.com Tue Feb 18 13:50:56 2020 From: quanah at symas.com (Quanah Gibson-Mount) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 10:50:56 -0800 Subject: Best practices for cyrus-sasl development In-Reply-To: <96aab659-8e8d-3ae6-a05d-38bff6e35219@fastmail.com> References: <4D5C5F42F1F8C83FE4E9BB79@[192.168.1.144]> <613297ba-db36-87ba-9dee-e67ebb7c49ac@fastmail.com> <6749B75365AA971714F5DE8A@[192.168.1.144]> <96aab659-8e8d-3ae6-a05d-38bff6e35219@fastmail.com> Message-ID: <8BBC15BA760E4478CC0DF2D1@[192.168.1.144]> --On Tuesday, February 18, 2020 1:45 PM -0500 Ken Murchison wrote: > I agree that we should sync 2.1 with master and use it for future 2.1 > releases and use master fir development. Ok. I tested a merge of origin/master, and it's clean. Would you like me to push that? That would definitely make it easier as I parse pull requests to be able to isolate bug fixes into master & 2.1, and new feature bits into master only. Regards, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: From murch at fastmail.com Tue Feb 18 13:51:36 2020 From: murch at fastmail.com (Ken Murchison) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 13:51:36 -0500 Subject: Best practices for cyrus-sasl development In-Reply-To: <8BBC15BA760E4478CC0DF2D1@[192.168.1.144]> References: <4D5C5F42F1F8C83FE4E9BB79@[192.168.1.144]> <613297ba-db36-87ba-9dee-e67ebb7c49ac@fastmail.com> <6749B75365AA971714F5DE8A@[192.168.1.144]> <96aab659-8e8d-3ae6-a05d-38bff6e35219@fastmail.com> <8BBC15BA760E4478CC0DF2D1@[192.168.1.144]> Message-ID: <8a20daf8-6300-4732-3795-93c551ac3e5b@fastmail.com> On 2/18/20 1:50 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: > > > --On Tuesday, February 18, 2020 1:45 PM -0500 Ken Murchison > wrote: > >> I agree that we should sync 2.1 with master and use it for future 2.1 >> releases and use master fir development. > > Ok.? I tested a merge of origin/master, and it's clean.? Would you > like me to push that?? That would definitely make it easier as I parse > pull requests to be able to isolate bug fixes into master & 2.1, and > new feature bits into master only. Go for it. -- Ken Murchison Cyrus Development Team Fastmail US LLC From quanah at symas.com Mon Feb 24 18:16:14 2020 From: quanah at symas.com (Quanah Gibson-Mount) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 15:16:14 -0800 Subject: Status of ftp server? Message-ID: Hi, The documentation in numerous places states that release tarballs can be obtained from "ftp.cyrusimap.org". However, this server appears to be offline. Example reference: Do all the various documentation locations referencing FTP need to be updated, or is it intended to bring the FTP server back online? The webserver frontend to the data appears to still work: Thanks, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: From ellie at fastmail.com Tue Feb 25 18:08:47 2020 From: ellie at fastmail.com (ellie timoney) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 10:08:47 +1100 Subject: Status of ftp server? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5546d52b-b23e-428c-afe6-3623b132416e@www.fastmail.com> The FTP is known to be down, and we don't expect it to come back. This is all still hosted by CMU at the moment, even though they've pulled out of the project. Our real plan has been to move the cyrusimap.org domain away from the CMU infrastructure and onto github.io (which doesn't provide FTP anyway), and then update all the documentation accordingly at once. (The temporary URL for the github.io site is https://cyrusimap.github.io, but once we have the real domain, we'll use that for it instead.) Getting action out of CMU is like pulling teeth though, so maybe we should just remove the dead FTP links from documentation in the meantime. I've been referring people to the github-hosted url's (i.e. under https://github.com/cyrusimap/cyrus-imapd/releases) in the release announcement emails, because I don't expect the "https://cyrusimap.org/releases" links to remain valid either, once the domain moves to githhub.io. Cheers, ellie On Tue, Feb 25, 2020, at 10:16 AM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: > Hi, > > The documentation in numerous places states that release tarballs can be > obtained from "ftp.cyrusimap.org". However, this server appears to be > offline. > > Example reference: > > > Do all the various documentation locations referencing FTP need to be > updated, or is it intended to bring the FTP server back online? > > The webserver frontend to the data appears to still work: > > > > Thanks, > Quanah > > -- > > Quanah Gibson-Mount > Product Architect > Symas Corporation > Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: > > From dave64 at andrew.cmu.edu Tue Feb 25 18:33:23 2020 From: dave64 at andrew.cmu.edu (Dave McMurtrie) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 18:33:23 -0500 (EST) Subject: Status of ftp server? In-Reply-To: <5546d52b-b23e-428c-afe6-3623b132416e@www.fastmail.com> References: <5546d52b-b23e-428c-afe6-3623b132416e@www.fastmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 26 Feb 2020, ellie timoney wrote: > The FTP is known to be down, and we don't expect it to come back. This > is all still hosted by CMU at the moment, even though they've pulled out > of the project. The infrastructure for cyrusimap.org is still running at CMU. I was unaware the ftp server was down. > Our real plan has been to move the cyrusimap.org domain away from the > CMU infrastructure and onto github.io (which doesn't provide FTP > anyway), and then update all the documentation accordingly at once. > (The temporary URL for the github.io site is > https://cyrusimap.github.io, but once we have the real domain, we'll use > that for it instead.) > > Getting action out of CMU is like pulling teeth though, so maybe we > should just remove the dead FTP links from documentation in the > meantime. Really? What was asked of us that we didn't respond to? Dave From brong at fastmailteam.com Wed Feb 26 02:35:54 2020 From: brong at fastmailteam.com (Bron Gondwana) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 18:35:54 +1100 Subject: Status of ftp server? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2f0498f4-4b39-43d0-bf00-badc4c7c4352@dogfood.fastmail.com> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020, at 10:16, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: > Hi, > > The documentation in numerous places states that release tarballs can be > obtained from "ftp.cyrusimap.org". However, this server appears to be > offline. > > Example reference: > > > Do all the various documentation locations referencing FTP need to be > updated, or is it intended to bring the FTP server back online? Thanks for reminding us about the FTP server situation, we'll figure something out shortly one way or the other. I suspect we'll actually move to entirely HTTP, since FTP is a pretty awful protocol to firewall and manage compared to HTTP which can be easily hosted directly out of Github, which is where our code and issue tracker is stored. Cheers, Bron. -- Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd brong at fastmailteam.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: