Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

Viktor.Dukhovni
Dear Heimdal Community,

As promised in:

  http://kerberos.996246.n3.nabble.com/Preparing-for-the-Heimdal-7-Release-td46250.html

we are pleased to announce the availability of Heimdal 7 release candidate 1 (i.e. 7.0.1).

The release download page is:

        https://github.com/heimdal/heimdal/releases/tag/heimdal-7.0.1

The source tarball can be downloaded from:

        https://github.com/heimdal/heimdal/releases/download/heimdal-7.0.1/heimdal-7.0.1.tar.gz
        https://github.com/heimdal/heimdal/releases/download/heimdal-7.0.1/heimdal-7.0.1.tar.gz.sig

        SHA256(heimdal-7.0.1.tar.gz)= 85971537cd439082437234172ec2da11f6601730233b204724d9d8c0a3b42af7
        SHA1(heimdal-7.0.1.tar.gz)= b33e2172cb7f77dc884afd4246905dab3bb62911

The signature key fingerprint is: E659 41B7 1CF3 C459 A34F  A89C 45E7 572A 28CD 8CC8

Please test this release.  If no significant issues are found, this will become
Heimdal 7.1 in ~14 days time.

--
   The Heimdal Release Team.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

Henry B (Hank) Hotz, CISSP-2
Yay!

Did I miss a 7.0 release? Also why does 7.0.1rcX automatically become 7.1?

While I’m asking, why are we renaming 1.7 as 7.x?

> On Nov 29, 2016, at 8:02 PM, Viktor Dukhovni <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Dear Heimdal Community,
>
> As promised in:
>
>  http://kerberos.996246.n3.nabble.com/Preparing-for-the-Heimdal-7-Release-td46250.html
>
> we are pleased to announce the availability of Heimdal 7 release candidate 1 (i.e. 7.0.1).
>
> The release download page is:
>
> https://github.com/heimdal/heimdal/releases/tag/heimdal-7.0.1
>
> The source tarball can be downloaded from:
>
> https://github.com/heimdal/heimdal/releases/download/heimdal-7.0.1/heimdal-7.0.1.tar.gz
> https://github.com/heimdal/heimdal/releases/download/heimdal-7.0.1/heimdal-7.0.1.tar.gz.sig
>
> SHA256(heimdal-7.0.1.tar.gz)= 85971537cd439082437234172ec2da11f6601730233b204724d9d8c0a3b42af7
> SHA1(heimdal-7.0.1.tar.gz)= b33e2172cb7f77dc884afd4246905dab3bb62911
>
> The signature key fingerprint is: E659 41B7 1CF3 C459 A34F  A89C 45E7 572A 28CD 8CC8
>
> Please test this release.  If no significant issues are found, this will become
> Heimdal 7.1 in ~14 days time.
>
> --
>   The Heimdal Release Team.

Personal email.  [hidden email]



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

Jeffrey Hutzelman
On Wed, 2016-11-30 at 11:38 -0800, Henry B (Hank) Hotz, CISSP wrote:
> Yay!
>
> Did I miss a 7.0 release? Also why does 7.0.1rcX automatically become
> 7.1?

No.  Apparently the next real release will be 7.1, and they're spelling
"7.1 release candidate 1" as "7.0.1".  I'm not sure what the thinking
is behind this odd numbering scheme.  It would be a whole lot easier to
understand if the first RC were 7.0rc1 and the first real release were
7.0.


> While I’m asking, why are we renaming 1.7 as 7.x?

Good question.  I look forward to hearing the answer.

-- Jeff
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

Quanah Gibson-Mount-2
--On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 2:56 PM -0500 Jeffrey Hutzelman
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Good question.  I look forward to hearing the answer.

All of this was already discussed in the 10/19/2016 email from Roland
Dowdeswell email with the subject "Preparing for the Heimdal 7 Release".

<http://www.h5l.org/pipermail/heimdal-discuss/2016-October/000048.html>

--Quanah


--

Quanah Gibson-Mount
Product Architect
Symas Corporation
Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:
<http://www.symas.com>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

Harald Barth-2
In reply to this post by Jeffrey Hutzelman

>> While I’m asking, why are we renaming 1.7 as 7.x?

I am more exited that there is work going on on a new release than I
am worried about the numbering now being 7.X instead of 1.7.X. As long
as the new number is bigger than the old one everything should be fine.
;-)

Harald.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

Måns Nilsson-3
Subject: Re: Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available Date: Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 09:09:39PM +0100 Quoting Harald Barth ([hidden email]):
>
> >> While I’m asking, why are we renaming 1.7 as 7.x?
>
> I am more exited that there is work going on on a new release than I
> am worried about the numbering now being 7.X instead of 1.7.X. As long
> as the new number is bigger than the old one everything should be fine.
> ;-)

++;

--
Måns Nilsson     primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE                             +46 705 989668
Look!  A ladder!  Maybe it leads to heaven, or a sandwich!

signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

Henry B (Hank) Hotz, CISSP-2
In reply to this post by Harald Barth-2
+1

> On Nov 30, 2016, at 12:09 PM, Harald Barth <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>>> While I’m asking, why are we renaming 1.7 as 7.x?
>
> I am more exited that there is work going on on a new release than I
> am worried about the numbering now being 7.X instead of 1.7.X. As long
> as the new number is bigger than the old one everything should be fine.
> ;-)
>
> Harald.

Personal email.  [hidden email]



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

Henry B (Hank) Hotz, CISSP-2
In reply to this post by Quanah Gibson-Mount-2
So it’s no longer possible to have non-numeric version numbers?

Please understand, I don’t really care. The new system is logical enough, even if unconventional. Just wondering what the actual reason was.

> On Nov 30, 2016, at 12:02 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> --On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 2:56 PM -0500 Jeffrey Hutzelman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Good question.  I look forward to hearing the answer.
>
> All of this was already discussed in the 10/19/2016 email from Roland Dowdeswell email with the subject "Preparing for the Heimdal 7 Release".
>
> <http://www.h5l.org/pipermail/heimdal-discuss/2016-October/000048.html>
>
> --Quanah
>
>
> --
>
> Quanah Gibson-Mount
> Product Architect
> Symas Corporation
> Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:
> <http://www.symas.com>
>

Personal email.  [hidden email]



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

Jeffrey Altman-2
Non-numeric version numbers are not portable.

On 11/30/2016 6:00 PM, Henry B (Hank) Hotz, CISSP wrote:

> So it’s no longer possible to have non-numeric version numbers?
>
> Please understand, I don’t really care. The new system is logical enough, even if unconventional. Just wondering what the actual reason was.
>
>> On Nov 30, 2016, at 12:02 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> --On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 2:56 PM -0500 Jeffrey Hutzelman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Good question.  I look forward to hearing the answer.
>>
>> All of this was already discussed in the 10/19/2016 email from Roland Dowdeswell email with the subject "Preparing for the Heimdal 7 Release".
>>
>> <http://www.h5l.org/pipermail/heimdal-discuss/2016-October/000048.html>
>>
>> --Quanah
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Quanah Gibson-Mount
>> Product Architect
>> Symas Corporation
>> Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:
>> <http://www.symas.com>
>>
>
> Personal email.  [hidden email]
>
>
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Heimdal 7 Release candidate 1 (7.0.1) available

Marcin Cieslak-3
In reply to this post by Henry B (Hank) Hotz, CISSP-2
On Wed, 30 Nov 2016, Henry B (Hank) Hotz, CISSP wrote:

> So it’s no longer possible to have non-numeric version numbers?
>
> Please understand, I don’t really care. The new system is logical enough, even if unconventional. Just wondering what the actual reason was.

This unconventional system has one advantage: the version number
never goes "back" from 7.0.rc1 rc2 rc3 prereleases to 7.0.
Packaging systems those days employ various "hacks" to understand that "2.rcX" is
actually "less than "2.0".

I am annoyed a bit with software like node that reports something like "v8.0.0"
in the earliest git master code which is the same version number that might be
releasesd in a year. "7.0.1", "7.0.2", "7.0.3" can be bumped as we go in the git
development and they can progress over time.

This is important especially since git is everywhere there are no SVN-style
linear version numbers available.

so I'd say unconventional, yes, but possibly useful. And I never like ".0" releases anyway :)

Marcin