Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Discuss experimenting with R5 on IGs #208

Open
lukeaduncan opened this issue Oct 26, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Discuss experimenting with R5 on IGs #208

lukeaduncan opened this issue Oct 26, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees
@lukeaduncan @JohnMoehrke
Labels
Dev-L Development effort is Large Review-S Development effort is Small
Projects
ITI Project Planning

Comments

@lukeaduncan
Copy link
Contributor

Review IGs to see where there may be larger issues with conversion to R5 so we can be aware of what will be involved in upgrading in the future.
Can also discuss options for publishing anything as R5.
@lukeaduncan lukeaduncan created this issue from a note in ITI Project Planning (Under assessment by planning) Oct 26, 2023
@lukeaduncan lukeaduncan moved this from Under assessment by planning to Planning Assessed Work Items in ITI Project Planning Oct 26, 2023
@lukeaduncan lukeaduncan added Review-S Development effort is Small Dev-L Development effort is Large labels Oct 26, 2023
@lukeaduncan lukeaduncan moved this from Planning Assessed Work Items to In development by Tech in ITI Project Planning Oct 26, 2023
@lukeaduncan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Possible choices, potential order. BALP has lots of dependencies. Will have to see how a branch and CI build affects dependencies. May require local build and use #dev as dependency.

  • BALP (not expecting any issues, review any changes for relevance)
  • PDQm (not expecting any issues)
  • PIXm (not expecting any issues)
  • NPFS (expecting issues)
  • MHD (expecting issues)
  • mCSD (not expecting any issues, review any changes for relevance)
  • SVCM (not expecting any issues, review any changes for relevance)
  • PCF (not expecting any issues, review any changes for relevance)
  • DSUBm (move off the backport, review other changes)

@lukeaduncan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Will continue to experiment. Only looking at R5, but when R6 is available will move to that. Cotinuing with:

  • mCSD
  • BALP
  • MHD
  • PCF
  • mXDE

@lukeaduncan lukeaduncan moved this from In development by Tech to Task complete in ITI Project Planning May 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@lukeaduncan lukeaduncan

@JohnMoehrke JohnMoehrke

Labels
Dev-L Development effort is Large Review-S Development effort is Small
Projects
ITI Project Planning
Status: Task complete
ITI Project Planning
  
Task complete
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@lukeaduncan @JohnMoehrke