db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kathy Saunders <kat...@mtrad.com>
Subject Re: 10.2 plans (was Re: 10.2 licensing issue)
Date Tue, 12 Sep 2006 01:21:04 GMT

Andrew McIntyre wrote:

> Taking this over to derby-dev...
> On 9/11/06, Kathey Marsden <kmarsdenderby@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> Many of these regressions sadly have already made their way into 10.1.3
>> and therefore are being picked up by users for production.  I
>> think we need to notify the user community of the situation, try to get
>> more user input on 10.2 and  flush out more regressions.   We port fixes
>> to 10.1 to try to get it to  a stable state and then release 10.2.  Also
>> any ideas anyone has for new optimizer tests would be good and folks
>> could write those.
>> Those are all my ideas for now.  It could be that lots of users  have
>> tried 10.2 without problems but haven't reported in and then it is just
>> a matter of getting them to speak up.
> I don't think we should hold up the 10.2 release except for known
> regressions. I think it's a chicken-and-egg problem. Users aren't
> motivated to try out the beta, because it's extra time and effort on
> their part, so you aren't actually informed about regressions until
> the regression is in a release that people actually try to use. Better
> to release early so new code gets into actual user's hands so
> regressions can be flushed out sooner. Regressions happen, and no
> release is ever go to be perfect (although that would be nice,
> wouldn't it?).
> Better to release often so code where regressions have been identified
> and fixed get into user's hands sooner.
> I think releasing early and often is an area we as a community, and
> individually through the tasks we take on for any particular release,
> could improve.
> andrew
I second Andrew's comments.  Kathey has been a great quality advocate 
for Derby, and I hope will continue to speak up.  But, in this case, I'm 
not sure what decisive action we can take prior to a 10.2 release.  
We've asked the user community to test with some response, but not a 
lot.  The users will only do their testing when they are motivated.  I 
think it's excellent that users were invited to do testing, and I see 
that Kathey posted again asking for more testing, which is great.  
However, unless we have a specific regression or action that needs to be 
taken, I don't believe it makes sense to talk about holding up Derby 
10.2 for quality issues.  Let's get it out there, and if there are 
regressions (in my experience working in technical support for 
commercial products for 15 years, there are always regressions), we can 
get new builds and/or a maintenance release out.  On the other hand, if 
we have any specific quality issues that should be addressed prior to a 
10.2 release, let's talk about those.


View raw message