[mosh-devel] Mosh 1.4.0 is available on GitHub

[Keith Winstein]

Thanks Ben. I didn't realize we had pushed an unsigned tag already. I
guess... my tentative thought would be let's un-push the "mosh-1.4.0" tag
since I'd rather maintain past practice and have that be a signed tag
anyway. Unless you think this will cause lots of problems (but I don't
think it will). I don't think we need to rev the version number unless you
do.

And then I think sure, please do what you think is right with the ChangeLog
and the debian/changelog however you prefer, and then I can tag and sign
that and we can cut the source tarball from there. Sorry for the
last-minute friction here.

-Keith

On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 7:14 PM Benjamin Barenblat <bbarenblat at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Wednesday, October 26, 2022, at  8:33 PM -0700, Keith Winstein wrote:
> > (1) Should we update the ChangeLog file for the source release? It looks
> > like you (and achin?) already wrote text for it.
>
> I completely forgot about the changelog. Yes, we should update that.
> What do you think – should we update the changelog and push a 1.4.1 tag,
> or should we update the changelog and replace the existing 1.4.0 tag
> with a new one that includes the changelog update?
>
> > (2) Should I make the final 1.4.0 debian/changelog entry (probably
> > including the same bullet points as we'll put into ChangeLog) or do you
> > want to make a PR for that?
>
> I can take care of the Debian work. Debian generally prefers to keep
> upstream changelog entries out of debian/changelog – debian/changelog is
> supposed to be a changelog for the packaging, not the package. But I’ll
> make sure the Mosh changelog is included in /usr/share/doc/mosh.
>
> > (3) In the past the release announcement email named/credited the
> "primary
> > developer and release manager" -- what do you want it to say this time?
> > (I.e who should be credited and in what order?)
>
> For developers, it looks like cgull, Anders, Alex, and I all contributed
> over 100 lines of diff to Mosh since the last release. It’s an arbitrary
> cutoff, but it seems as good as any to me. I think cgull should probably
> go first on the list, since they were making active contributions until
> 2021.
>
> As for release manager, I think that’s Alex. He was definitely the
> forcing function here. :)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/mosh-devel/attachments/20221027/07eb573e/attachment.htm>