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: Blockers and 10.4
Date Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:31:24 GMT
Hi Dyre,

These two issues were marked as blockers by the people who logged them. 
Is that anything more than a statement of how much pain these issues 
cause those people? If I were to categorize issues according to the 
severity of their impact, it would look something like this (in 
declining order of significance):

1) Engine crashes
2) Data corruption
3) Wrong results
4) Failures (e.g., a query just aborts)
5) Misleading messages, typos, ugly formatting, ...

These two issues seem to fall into category (4). If I were release 
manager, I would downgrade these to the level of other NPEs and query 
aborts--beneath the significance of issues in category (3).

You, of course, are the release manager. It's up to you to publish your 
criteria for ranking issues. It may also be helpful to ask the user 
community to vote on which issues are most important to them.

Thanks,
-Rick


Dyre.Tjeldvoll@Sun.COM wrote:
> Currently we have two JIRA issues classified as "Blockers":
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3260
>
> and
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3303
>
>
> DERBY-3260 has a patch which has been reviewed favorably by Knut, but I
> feel that the following quote from his comment deserves some attention:
>
> "It would be interesting, though, if someone could shed some light on
> why the synchronization was commented out in the first place. This piece
> of code hasn't been changed since the code was donated to Apache, so the
> commit log doesn't tell us anything about it."
>
>
> It seems like both DERBY-3303 and its "Critical" cousin DERBY-3231
> are caused by rev 516454 (fix for DERBY-681), (a fix was checked in for
> DERBY-3231, but it remains open). Is there any chance of these being
> fixed in time for 10.4?
>
>   


Mime
View raw message