commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From robert burrell donkin <>
Subject Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Digester 1.5 Released
Date Mon, 28 Apr 2003 10:41:35 GMT
On Monday, April 28, 2003, at 12:04 AM, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:

> On Sun, 28 Apr 2003, Simon Kitching wrote:
>> Date: 28 Apr 2003 09:31:21 +1200
>> From: Simon Kitching <>
>> Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Users List <>
>> To: Jakarta Commons Users List <>
>> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Digester 1.5 Released
>> Hi Robert,
>> The release notes specify that the enhancements for digester 1.5 include
>> bug #12997.
>> The description of this concerned me, so I checked bugzilla. According
>> to bugzilla, this is still an open item, with some significant concerns
>> having been expressed by Craig McClanahan (which I would agree with).
>> Is this just a typo in the release notes, or has the behaviour of the
>> CallMethodRule indeed changed??
> It has not changed.  As I stated in the trail of comments in the bug
> report, things that break backwards compatibility like this will not be
> accepted.  The only reason the bug report is still open is as a reminder
> that we need a unit test to mimic code that depends on the current
> behavior (similar to the config file parsing code in Tomcat and Struts)
> that would break if a change like this were to be made.


craig suggested that we alter the release process slightly by including 
unaddressed bug reports in the release notes rather than by marking LATER 
then reopening them once the build has been completed. i had hoped that by 
including that bug in a section entitled 'Outstanding Reports' it would be 
reasonably clear that it hadn't been addressed.

i understand craig's reasoning (marking as LATER requires a comment and 
for long running unresolved reports this leads to a string of 
release-related comments) but maybe including these in the release notes 
is a little confusing.

- robert

View raw message