db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Proposal for 10.2 release schedule
Date Thu, 22 Jun 2006 21:06:14 GMT
Hi Dan,

Thanks for your comments. Some further remarks follow.

Regards,
-Rick

Daniel John Debrunner wrote:

>Rick Hillegas wrote:
>
>
>  
>
>>Kathey Marsden wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>>What happens between September 15 and End of October on the 10.2 branch?
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>>If we fix critical bugs during that time in the 10.2 branch can't they
>>>go into the release end of October?
>>>      
>>>
>
>They should be able to. Since we won't have had a GA release (JCP rules)
>until Mustang ships, it seems any critical bug that we find and fix
>between Sep 15th and Mustang shipping has the potential to require a new
>release candidate and new vote. Could even be a database format change.
>  
>
Let me work out the implications of this.

o Mustang would ship with a release candidate which the community rejected.
o The community would approve a later release candidate and promote it 
to GA status.
o Bug reports would come in against both the rejected candidate bundled 
into Mustang and the approved candidate which was promoted to GA status.

A couple issues come to mind:

o In those bug reports, how would we disambiguate the release 
candidates? We could bump the last digit of the release identifier after 
producing the first candidate. Or we could rely on the full version id 
produced by sysinfo, which contains the subversion revision number.

o The database format change troubles me. What happens if someone 
creates a database with the rejected release candidate bundled with 
Mustang? I think we want that database to play well with the approved 
release candidate which goes GA.

>>Suppose we were able to publish the 10.2 release candidate (make it GA)
>>right after we vetted it in mid-September. When would you want to
>>produce the follow-on bug fix release? At the end of October? A couple
>>months later? We could do either. The community may want to defer the
>>follow-on bug fix release for a couple months. That would give us time
>>to collect more feedback from users of the published, GA release.
>>However, we could "release early, release often" and produce another
>>release from the 10.2 branch at the end of October.
>>    
>>
>
>Not sure I understand the point of this paragraph. I thought the JCP
>rules mean we can't make 10.2 GA in mid-Sep, thus it seems to be a
>hypothetical impossible situation.
>
>Dan.
>
>  
>
That's right. This is an impossible, hypothetical situation. I was 
trying to compare Kathey's scenario to a scenario which could arise if 
we didn't have the JCP restrictions: Suppose we produce a GA feature 
release and a week later we discover that the release has a horrendous, 
data-corrupting bug. We might produce a bug fix release a couple weeks 
after the bad release.


Mime
View raw message