forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject Re: planning the 0.8 release (Was: [RT] structurer location and resource types)
Date Mon, 27 Mar 2006 04:06:27 GMT
Ross Gardler wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> >I am pulling the bits out of this RT that concern the
> >release. Please add more from the other replies.
> >
> >This thread can identify what needs to be done.
> >Out of it we can develop a release plan which
> >defines a realistic target date. Voting on that
> >plan is necessary and has the advantage of drawing
> >attention to getting ready for the release.
> >
> >Gav.... wrote:
> >>Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> >>>David Crossley escribi??:
> >>>
> >>>>I would like us to get moving on solving the
> >>>>general issues for the release, not just the
> >>>>dispatcher ones. We are dragging on too long.
> >>>
> >>>What are the general issues? Why do you think *we* are only focusing on
> >>>dispatcher ones?
> >>
> >>Dispatcher is moving along quickly, and so I guess is receiving a lot of 
> >>focus
> >>at the moment, which is good. I do think though that other issues are 
> >>taking a
> >>back seat at the moment. I for one have been focusing my attentions on 
> >>getting
> >>dispatcher working on my system, trying to find things I could contribute 
> >>to it,
> >>this has the impact of me not looking at Jira for other issues that need 
> >>attention.
> >
> >Well said Gav. This is what i meant by my comments.
> >
> >None of us are even bothering to categorise the issues
> >in Jira, so that we know what needs to be done for the
> >release. Every ForrestFriday we say that we will do it
> >but we don't.
> This is not quite true. We are making good progress on using Jira better.

I know that we are much improved.

> I've put in loads of effort to keep the locationmap work well defined in 
> Jira.

Well done. That is one of the important multi-faceted

> I've also done lots of work on trying to define what will be in 
> the 0.8 release (after discussion and agreement on list, but no vote).

Yes you did, thanks. However there is more
such classification needed.

> Similarly, Thorsten has begun to make considerable use of JIRA with the 
> work required on Dispatcher.
> Many of us are starting to remember to put issue numbers in commit messages.
> There is room for improvement, but I think we are certainly going in the 
> right direction.

I agree.

> >Attention is being drawn away from the release.
> >It is a natural thing for the exciting new development
> >to cause that. We need to balance that urge with
> >needing to get the release out the door.
> Yes, I nearly fell over when someone else committed something on the 0.8 
> roadmap today (thanks again).
> Having said that, people should be free to work where they need to work, 
> my comment above is not intended to point fingers - I've not found much 
> time for Forrest code recently ([OT] I do have some cool new plugins 
> "coming soon" - most notably an OSCommerce input plugin - really handy 
> for printed catalogues - now if only the dispatcher could product PDF... ).
> >My comment was meant to say: lets take a breath, pause,
> >tidy up, and get the release out ASAP.
> +1, especally to the "tidy up" part. Forrest is getting to be a real 
> mess with far too many unfinished parts. See the 0.8 roadmap in Jira, in 
> this roadmap I have tried to pull together those lose ends.
> >>So lets talk about it, I guess we need to filter Jira for what IS holding 
> >>up
> >>a 0.8 release and go through them. Perhaps the next Forrest Friday should
> >>focus on this.
> >
> >Yes. Again. I put a helluva lot of effort in
> >to implement our discussion about adding a
> >new category to jira so that we can classify
> >issues properly and get a rough idea about what
> >is needed for the release:
> >
> >
> >
> How many times can I repeat myself in one mail:
> This roadmap was done before the urgency field was added, and I confess 
> I have not been through the whole thing again to add this field 
> information. I don't actually think there is a need to since I moved all 
> of the none core stuff out of the 0.8 release. Plugins can have 
> different release cycles (at least they can if we tidy of the versioned 
> plugins system - which is in the 0.8 roadmap). The urgency field is only 
> really important when plugins are thrown into the mix.

The "roadmap" mixes in all of the plugins issues.
The so-called "Priority" is a reporter-based priority.

We had a huge discussion about this and the outcome was
that the "roadmap" gives us a rough idea, but the new
"urgency" filter would define how we, the project,
see the state of things.

The trouble is that we have not done the next phase
after your classification. We need to assess each
issue that you have put in the roadmap and assign
the Urgency.

We also need regularly look at the "unscheduled"
filter and add some to the roadmap. There have
been many new issues added since you did that
initial classification.

> >>What are the improvements to Forrest other than dispatcher
> >>that warrant there being a 0.8 release ?
> >
> >Lets make a dotpoint list here in email.
> For my take on this see the (yawn) 0.8 roadmap. I'm not about to do it 
> all again - others can add/remove as they see fit. I'll re-emerge when 
> the discussion dies down and a vote is called.

Apart from a simple list of all issues that have
been fixed, i don't see any dotpoint list in the
roadmap that we can use to write the release notes.

As described above, the main incentives are the things that
will go into our release notes. These notes are manually
gleaned from status.xml file with the assistance of
the releaseNotes_0.8-dev.html

> >We could do a 0.7.1 release from the branch.
> >However it would be better to release 0.8 which
> >includes all those fixes and much more.
> +1 to a 0.8 release when stuff is done
> -0 to a 0.7.1 release
> >>Should Dispatcher, although as you suggest, not part of the 0.8 release 
> >>program
> >>and not holding up a 0.8 release, be moved from Whiteboard into 
> >>core/plugin at
> >>the same time, now, or after ?
> >
> >Anytime. However it takes someone to research the
> >side-effects, make a proposal, co-ordinate it.
> >
> >My current opinion is that it should happen after
> >the release. Lets explore that topic in a separate
> >thread.
> That was the original plan: get 0.8 out, then do the integration work 
> for Dispatcher and get 0.9 out. 0.9 would also include the new 
> properties system, which is required by the dispatcher.
> Of course, if dispatcher remains a plugin, it can be released at any time.
> >>What are the incentives for users to upgrade to 0.8 from 0.7 ?
> >
> >See the need for release notes above.
> One more time....
> and the 0.8 roadmap in Jira ;-)

Yes, that provides the list of all fixed issues.

The svn mailing list provides a list of every change.

The changes.html should list the main changes.

The "importance" attribute should list the important
changes, but see


View raw message