db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kathey Marsden <kmarsdende...@sbcglobal.net>
Subject Re: remaining 10.2 blocker
Date Sat, 22 Jul 2006 03:24:54 GMT
Rick Hillegas wrote:

> That leaves one last unassigned blocker:

I think two new issues DERBY-1569 and DERBY-1564  look potentially 
*very* problematic and may quite possibly be serious regressions.
We also have two known regressions[1].    If  I would vote -1 on the 
release if any of  these are not  resolved, should I mark them fix 
version  10.2?    Do I mark them BLOCKER or Critical even though that 
doesn't match the Jira description of these fields [2]? 
Of course there is still the outstanding issue of what 10.2 fixin means 
for unassigned issues we talked in this thread"

Does that approach seem reasonable? If so I can put it on the Wiki.  
Alternately we could  just not muddy the Jira descriptions of these 
fields and only mark only mark Fix Version 10.2 for an unassigned  if we 
would  vote -1 on the release if it is not fixed,  mark the priorities 
objectively based on the Jira priority descriptions[2 ]  and  use  the 
Wiki or some other mechanism for community bug review and identification 
of high value fixes.

Thanks for the help in understanding what to do here.


[1] Known Regressions 

[2] Jira field  descriptions (really more severity)

[3]  Current 10.2 unassigned issues (76)  - I  think this list means 
nothing at all right now because nobody is answering the same question.

View raw message