flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] No RC process for releases
Date Mon, 01 Dec 2014 07:11:48 GMT

> We did not deal with cross-domain security in the TDF 1.0 or 1.1,
> otherwise you would have been more familiar with it in 1.2.

And there was no need to do so either in 1.2, the default sandboxing method is the most secure
way of loading 3rd party content. 3rd party support was discussed on the list many weeks before
the release. eg early Oct [4] and Aug [5] + other conversations. You were involved in these
discussions and raised no objections then.

> Let me know if this link doesn’t work, but the archives [1] show that you
> posted the VOTE thread and DISCUSS thread together which is the “old” way.

Yes each vote must have a discussion thread so you don't pollute the vote thread / makes it
easier to collate the votes. Why would you do that differently? It sounds like you were expecting
something different. Even more reason to document this new process. You must have a RC to
vote on to make a release, there's no way of getting around that Apache requirement and it's
also a requirement much know exactly what went into it, so it needs to be tagged etc etc

The actual email / discussion about the release was started earlier on 26th October  [1] so
RC0 wasn't a surprise. The only issue found during the first no RC phase was an error with
a title and a few minor wording changes hence once that was fixed and no one else raised any
other issue to make and vote on RC0. You can see the full thread here [2]. Note that 3rd party
support is also discussed in that thread.


1. http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/flex-dev/201410.mbox/%3c1318BDE8-04E9-4BCB-8F8F-ACC3081F89DB@classsoftware.com%3e
2. http://markmail.org/thread/5bu2t6dus4g2zzty
3. http://markmail.org/thread/hbl5j5w2ypes4qvh
4. http://markmail.org/thread/senoiggwpjnvsfpj

View raw message