forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Release early, release often(Re: Using Jira and branches for Project Management)
Date Wed, 17 Aug 2005 00:02:03 GMT
Tim Williams wrote:
> On 8/16/05, Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>>David Crossley wrote:
>>
>>>Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Diwaker Gupta wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>IMHO, we do not practice "release early, release often", often enough
:)
>>>
>>>[ snip ]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I think we are all in agreement with this. So lets plan a 0.8 milestone
>>>>1 release. On one of the major features in 0.8 will be Locationmaps.
>>>
>>>
>>>What is meant by a "milestone" release, and why not just call
>>>it 0.8 final? Then get on with 0.9 which will be forrest:views.
>>>I do not see the need for this M1 and M2 stuff.
>>
>>That is fine by me as long as it doesn't upset the forrest:views people.
>>I don't want to  give the impression that I'm proposing pushing
>>forrest:views back.
>>
>>Mind you since locationmap was originally committed during the 0.5
>>development cycle it's release is overdue a little more than
>>forrest:views ;-)
>>
>>Are others OK with doing a 0.8 with the locationmap and doing a 0.9 with
>>forrest:views?
> 
> 
> I gather this is a departure from the suggestion the other day that a
> release is cooked when 0 or few issues left in JIRA?  

Well I was a little unclear about this statement. David partially 
clarified what I intended to say. The truth is we sometimes reduce the 
count to 0 by reassigning issues to later releases.

I think the point is that at present we do not classify our issues well. 
We tend to lump them into a fix version without considering their impact 
on the overall strategy of Forrest development.

We also don't give enough priority to bugs in existing functionality, 
you can see this in the fact that my suggested milestones don't mention 
bugs that should be fixed for 0.8 (this needs addressing)

> I'm not sure
> what features should qualify for a new release but locationmap seems
> to be widely useful or visible so I'm not sure that it rates the
> distinction of a "key feature" driving the release.  I don't have a
> problem with it, just think this is a lot like having a release for
> code refactoring -- (i.e., not much for a user to get excited about).

Actually, I disagree. The locationmap enables a whole range of 
functionality that was not possible before. It is not just the ability 
to improve our xmap structure. We can now retrieve content from multiple 
  sources. We no longer limit the client URL space to the document 
structure defined within Forrest and we can now create multiple sites 
structures from the same content sources.

I do see it as a fundamental improvement in functionality. It might be I 
am the only one with these use cases, but I have proposed a number of 
talks at ApacheCon that I could not have done without Locationmap. I 
believe there is a wider use base or this functionality.

Ross

Ross

Mime
View raw message