forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gav...." <brightoncomput...@brightontown.com.au>
Subject RE: fixing bugs in trunk or branch
Date Mon, 07 May 2007 22:52:54 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferdinand Soethe [mailto:ferdinand@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 8 May 2007 4:03 AM
> To: dev@forrest.apache.org
> Subject: Re: fixing bugs in trunk or branch
> 
> I'm sorry to have stepped out of line. I hadn't found Cyriaques solution
> when I looked for it. So I tracked down the bug on my own (in far too
> much time) and wanted to share the work with others. That's all.

I don't recall this sort of thing being discussed before - patching earlier
releases - though David has been doing some doc updates relative to this on
occasion.

No apology needed as far as I can see, we need to discuss it now to be clear
what should and shouldn't get done.

> 
> What I don't get: Had I found Cyriaques solution and copied it in .7
> what would have been different? It still would have required testing
> give that .7 is a different environment that .8. It still would have
> only been me to test it given.
> 
> We still wouldn't be sure that it really works.
> 
> And I may be mistaken here but I thought the version I fixed is a yet
> unreleased update to a released version. Not?

This is true, there is a doc trail missing here though, how do current users
of 0.7 know that this patch is available, where is the patch to be provided
as an official download for current 0.7 users, what is the process for
releasing patches for earlier versions, do we need to vote on a patch
release etc etc...

The downside here is , you can see what extra work will be required to keep
maintaining and patching updates for 0.7, this takes away time from the
current 0.8 release which I guess we will maintain for a while, and also
trunk.


> 
> Best regards,
> Ferdinand
> 
> 
> P.S. One thing I really really disliked about commercial software was
> the fact that you were always forced into upgrading because bugs would
> only get fixed in new releases.

I guess there will be differing opinions here, new releases come about as a
result of two things mainly, new features and bug-fixes found in older
versions. How far back does one go in maintaining older releases?

Finally, these are 0.x versions, they are really beta/minor releases, and as
such, open source or not we are not bound to keep users of previous versions
happy, they know the risks. We provide an update path to 0.8.

My 2 cents, leave 0.7 alone and lets concentrate on 0.9-dev, if we find
things we can apply to 0.8 then fair enough, we need to have a patch-release
system for current users of 0.8, not just patch 0.8 for those that have not
already downloaded it.

Gav...



Mime
View raw message