[Reviewers] 4.3 delayed: should we unfreeze on 8/1 anyway?

[Augie Fackler]

> On Jul 31, 2017, at 13:32, Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz at google.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 31, 2017 10:09 AM, "Augie Fackler" <raf at durin42.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Jul 31, 2017, at 12:36, Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Jul 31, 2017, at 08:13, Augie Fackler <raf at durin42.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> We need to hold 4.3 for a few days (possibly a week?) because of some security fixes and coordinating with other tools.
> >>
> >> Should we unfreeze default on the first anyway, and cut the 4.3 release from stable once we've got the all-clear?
> >
> > Since we're actively trying to lower contribution friction and since freezes are harmful to that goal, my vote is to unfreeze as planned.
> 
> Works for me.
> 
> That works for me too.
> 
> 
> If anyone else has opinions (especially dissenting ones), please speak up today. Thanks!
> 
> Reasons against unfreezing seem like they would likely be related to the reasons we have a freeze. IIUC, the reason for the freeze is to force people (mostly mercurial developers) to test the release candidate and not the default branch. If that's right, I guess the question is whether we think the RC has been tested enough.

*nods* Barring any objection, I'll announce the unfreeze-but-no-release-yet tomorrow AM America/New_York.

> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Reviewers mailing list
> Reviewers at mercurial-scm.org
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/reviewers
>