forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <cross...@apache.org>
Subject Re: 0.7 is nearly there
Date Tue, 24 May 2005 11:22:28 GMT
Ross Gardler wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> >Ross Gardler wrote:
> >
> >>Yes, that will go with a cocoon upgrade that needs to be done for two of
> >>the outstanding issues anyway.
> >
> >Which issues are you talking about Ross? Are they critical?
> 
> "Lazy Mode: True" messages are just an output issue, I'm good with that.
> 
> "character entities (e.g. ampersand) are expanded again for href or src 
> attributes" (http://issues.cocoondev.org/browse/FOR-241 ) is marked as 
> major, comments indicate it is fixed in Cocoon trunk.

Ah, no, i see that my comment has misled you. I just meant that the
Cocoon Hello World sample did not exhibit the problem. It might be our
sitemaps. Anyway, it is a known problem, we don't actually need to
fix it.

> This issue only affects users running in dynamic mode since the encoding 
> of request parameters when creating a static site breaks the links 
> anyway (there can be no '?' in a filename, so no static link can be made)
> 
> The other issue seems to have been closed (or moved).
> 
> >I reckon that we should not wait for a Cocoon upgrade.
> 
> Since I don't have Linux right now and Juan (I think it was Juan who 
> took the time to try the upgrade, apologies if I'm not giving the 
> credit to the right person) has encountered problems with the upgrade I 
> am +1 on going ahead without the upgrade. Lets just say if we don't get 
> a -1 in the next three days we will go ahead and move those issues to 
> 0.8. If someone wants to -1 this proposal then *they* will have to do 
> the upgrade - fair enough?

Yes Juan==Cheche did try, and he contacted cocoon-dev and got positive
reply to his specific issue. However other people are saying cocoon
trunk is not stable.

> >I will attend to FOR-500 verifying the licenses for supporting
> >products and generally ensure that our own work is properly
> >licensed, but i don't want to do that until just before release
> >in case more stuff gets added.
> 
> I'll finish FOR-470 (update seed site)
> 
> I'll also finsih FOR-454, major changes are now marked up in status.xml, 
> we need a stylesheet for projectInfo to allow them to be included in 
> relevant docs with xi:include (unless someone gets there first of course).

FOR-454 was actually about adding more content to "upgrading_07" doc.
That should be a group effort, but if you get time to try that would be good.

The extra improvement about getting announcement automatically
notes out of the status.xml is a bonus, we don't need it for release.
We can just manually write the etc/announcement-0.7.txt

> That leaves:
> 
> FOR-391    	 website docs/site split
> http://issues.cocoondev.org/browse/FOR-391
> 
> Which I believe is complete but for thorough testing, the creation of 
> the 0.8 set of docs and the move to 0.7 as the default (the move should 
> be done as part of the release process)
> 
> This is currently assigned to David, but I believe this is a job for 
> many eyes now. We need people to look for problems. Shall we post a 
> request to the user list to check these docs?

Job is done.

That is a good idea. The dev list too. There must be a lot of lurkers.

What would we ask? We don't want reports that we need more docs
about so-and-so or that we need to create a beginners tutorial.
Mainly we need to find instructions and pathnames that still
relate to 0.6 version. Anything else can wait until 0.8-dev

> ---
> 
> FOR-465    	 Logging Error: Writing event to closed stream.
> http://issues.cocoondev.org/browse/FOR-465
> 
> I have no idea what is causing this so someone needs to do some initial 
> evaluation.
> 
> I'd be OK with this still being in the release as it does not affect the 
> usability of Forrest. So again, I propose we release without this fixed 
> unless someone votes -1 *and* fixes it for us.
> 
> ---
> 
> Of course, my proposal to require a "-1 and a fix" could be seen as 
> railroading the release, it is a step ahead of lazy consensus, ...

What about when that person gets drawn off by other itches
and we have a half-finished solution. Delay.

> ... so I 
> won't argue the point if devs feel this is not an appropriate. I just 
> want to get this release out.

Don't we all.

--David

Mime
View raw message