Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-forrest-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 31044 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2006 02:23:54 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Aug 2006 02:23:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 88848 invoked by uid 500); 24 Aug 2006 02:23:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-forrest-dev-archive@forrest.apache.org Received: (qmail 88797 invoked by uid 500); 24 Aug 2006 02:23:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@forrest.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@forrest.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@forrest.apache.org Received: (qmail 88786 invoked by uid 99); 24 Aug 2006 02:23:52 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:23:52 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=UNPARSEABLE_RELAY X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [203.121.192.7] (HELO mail.e-wire.net.au) (203.121.192.7) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:23:52 -0700 Received: from webmail.e-wire.net.au (mail.e-wire.net.au [127.0.0.1]) by mail.e-wire.net.au (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k7O2NTxm016197 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:23:29 +0800 Received: from perm-colo-web1 [203.121.192.11] for mail.e-wire.net.au (EHLO webmail.e-wire.net.au) via SMTP; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:23:29 +0800 Received: from 124.168.75.181 (SquirrelMail authenticated user br_gavmc) by webmail.e-wire.net.au with HTTP; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:23:29 +0800 (WST) Message-ID: <1092.124.168.75.181.1156386209.squirrel@webmail.e-wire.net.au> In-Reply-To: <20060824014550.GS25736@igg.indexgeo.com.au> References: <20060823070851.GK25736@igg.indexgeo.com.au> <000901c6c6ae$08564b00$0200a8c0@developer> <20060824014550.GS25736@igg.indexgeo.com.au> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:23:29 +0800 (WST) Subject: Re: [RT] A new Forrest implementation? From: "Gav..." To: dev@forrest.apache.org Reply-To: brightoncomputers@brightontown.com.au User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.6-7.el4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-BitDefender-SpamStamp: 1.1.4 049000040111AAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAI X-BitDefender-Spam: No (13) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > Gav.... wrote: >> >> Just on a year a go, a Jira Issue was set up entitled 'Forrest Strategy >> and >> direction' - seems appropriate to revisit that issue and see what ideas >> there have been dealt with, what we still need to deal with and what we >> can >> drop. >> >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOR-630 >> >> (Strange how a jira issue of Critical Priority is also unscheduled, just >> seems a little odd to me) > > We can only schedule an issue to be fixed before the > next release when there is something to be actually done. > That FOR-630 is just a bag of notes. I reckon that we have > already extracted any that really need to be done for > the 0.8 release. Ok, so do you think it should be closed? > > Perhaps there are more, but really we are trying to trim > the list down, rather than find more :-) Absolutely, I thought it relevent to this thread so just thought it worth a mention, otherwise why have it in the Jira for a year sitting there and not being useful. You may have noticed I just started to go through some of the unscheduled issues to see if any could be revisited, fixed, closed or left as is. As has been pointed out before users (that term again) get disheartened to see their issues sat there not been looked at, even if just to comment on it. And I like tying up loose ends if possible :) Gav... > > -David > -- Gav...