Release checklist

[rik]

> Subject:
> Re: Octave library version for release
> From:
> Mike Miller <address@hidden>
> Date:
> 04/23/2015 07:30 AM
> To:
> "John W. Eaton" <address@hidden>
> CC:
> Octave Maintainers <address@hidden>
> List-Post:
> <mailto:address@hidden>
> Content-Transfer-Encoding:
> quoted-printable
> Precedence:
> list
> MIME-Version:
> 1.0
> References:
> <address@hidden> <address@hidden>
> In-Reply-To:
> <address@hidden>
> Message-ID:
> <address@hidden>
> Content-Type:
> text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Message:
> 3
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 08:27:59 -0500, John W. Eaton wrote:
> > That's OK, I think this is something that should be done just before the
> > release.  At least you remembered!  I suppose "update library versions"
> > should be on a elease checklist somewhere.
> Sounds good. I'm just the messenger though, have to thank Rafael and
> Sébastien on the Debian packaging team for noticing this as part of
> packaging rc3, all I did was confirm that I had seen this and work up
> some examples to double check.
>
> > I'm sure we've removed, changed, and added public interfaces to liboctave,
> > liboctinterp, and liboctgui since the last release, so we should increment
> > the first version number for all of the libraries and set the other two to
> > zero as in the attached diff.
> Yep, untested but I think that works.
>
> What about the OCTAVE_API_VERSION string?

There are two files in etc/ that are being used to track this: CHECKLIST and RELEASE.PROCESS.  I would probably fold CHECKLIST in to the bottom of RELEASE.PROCESS and add the note about updating libary versions in RELEASE.PROCESS.

--Rik