forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org>
Subject Re: planning the 0.8 release (Was: [RT] structurer location and resource types)
Date Sun, 26 Mar 2006 08:01:37 GMT
Gav.... wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ross Gardler" <rgardler@apache.org>
> To: <dev@forrest.apache.org>
> 
>>
>>>> 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.
> 
> 
> Sorry, what I meant by that, is what improvements have already been made
> to warrant a 0.8 release.

Yes, you are right. My comment was not intended to discourage you or 
anyone else from having a discussion. It was intended to indicate that I 
have already made my contribution to that discussion. Please keep up the 
great work you are doing in this thread.

What we need to do is *finish* the improvements so we can release. That 
is what my roadmap in Jira is intended to help us manage.

> Ok, so there are 41 Issues that need clearing up, then we can release 
> 0.8 yes ?

That is my opinion, yes. Others need to look over the list and 
add/remove as necessary (after suitable discussion where necessary).

> Looking at the first on the list , FOR-591, this is a Cocoon Issue 
> (Cocoon-1574) and they are working on it, however the last comment was 
> two months ago now. I have just added a comment to see how they are 
> getting on, if no near time frame for resolving it then maybe this will 
> have to be put back to a 0.9 release.#

It's a critical issue, can we afford to demote it? I don't think so, 
having a memory leak is a pretty major thing in a production environment.

> The next on the list, FOR-713, html-to-document no longer converts to 
> XDoc. Was wondering if any conversions have been missed, perhaps 
> references to html2document still exist in the processing, they do 
> certainly in the docs, I will patch the docs.

No it is a problem with some changes to the XSL that have been made in 
this iteration.

> Hmm, thinking about it before I carry on, I really should be adding 
> these notes to the issues themselves.

It's often easier to discuss here and link to the thread from JIRA, but 
please keep it to one issue per thread.

Ross

Mime
View raw message