Well, I've accepted all along that I have more things I want to get in
than most people. I don't think there's widespread agreement to
hold the branch until I'm done. At some point it will go into a
real freeze mode and then I'll stop wherever I am. :)
Still, there are 78 JIRAs marked for M5, so someone ought to go through those and decide which should be put off until M6.
On 9/19/2005 8:23 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:On 9/19/05, Alan D. Cabrera <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:Agreed, bug fixes we do put into both branches. However, Aaron is
talking about features, IIUC.
Just to be succinct, my -1 is a real technical veto on adding features,
not bug fixes, to both branches; though I am not intransigent and am
willing to discuss it further.I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, since I don't think I really said what I was talking about. But here's an example:
- Adding the management API for server logs. Without this, the console screen breaks if the Jetty GBean name is changed, and Tomcat does not work.
Now this is kind of a new feature, but kind of a bug fix too. I'd be inclined to put it in, since I think we'd like Tomcat to be fairly well supported, and the current code is arguably broken.
Some of the other JIRA's on my M5 list are:
- make the server require an argument if you want to give a list of Configurations to start on the command line
- make the deployer require an argument if you want it to run in offline mode
- invalid references in deployment plan should give meaningful error message to deployer
- breakage if more than one configuration manager found
- installer needs to be updated to reflect current product configuration options
This is a lot of work to add to two branches. Maybe we cut the branch too early.