Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of liushenf@gmail.com designates
 74.125.82.43 as permitted sender)
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
References: 
 <CACkxKgX2ydE4Do=RRzo0PSKXu-O_DbiLb23GP0V=aOGZaszhjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJ+c7QwRq=mUsA8eH=3o-ZmHjZL8+gvZTHV=0PobMwfwkmQCuA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOh1a4MaYyEYmT7-za2FKFyOjcZmF3R8_BYekqBbX-GCkn+YLg@mail.gmail.com>
 <001901cd4f61$14622210$3d266630$@acm.org> <4FE2B5C1.7080703@googlemail.com>
 <CACkxKgV85OdyYiX4wzbv8AdmrksPubnsWHGea8AFznd2qi=HLg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AB1DEB67-EA65-4EB3-ACA5-2DB0357EC4D8@gmail.com>
 <4FE30894.6030103@googlemail.com>
From: Shenfeng Liu <liushenf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=GB2312
In-Reply-To: <4FE30894.6030103@googlemail.com>
Message-Id: <C73CD0FC-4934-4FC9-B2EB-283992374CDC@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 23:44:39 +0200
To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)

Hi, Juergen,

=B7=A2=D7=D4=CE=D2=B5=C4 iPhone

=D4=DA 2012-6-21=A3=AC13:42=A3=ACJ=A8=B9rgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@googlemail=
.com> =D0=B4=B5=C0=A3=BA

> On 6/21/12 12:40 PM, Shenfeng Liu wrote:
>> I wonder if any one can help to update this criteria to 3.4.1 wiki ?
>=20
> I am not sure what you mean, do you mean to add a link on the wiki page
> to the definition of showstopper?

Yes, add a link if definition is already somewhere, or add a section in the w=
iki page to list the criteria, since as I remember this question was asked s=
everal times before... List it on wiki may not reduce the frequency of the a=
sking in ooo-dev mail thread, but can save us from recalling what was answer=
ed last time. :-P

>=20
>=20
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Feature+Pl=
anning
>=20
> by the way I moved this page under Releases -> AOO 3.4.1 but the link
> still works
>=20
> The idea was to reduce the redundant version number in each page name,
> see
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Unofficial+Developer+=
Snapshots
>=20
> But as I have noticed afterwards it doesn't really work because the page
> itself is under OOOUSERS directly. I thought it would be saved
> hierarchical as in mediawiki :-(
>=20
>=20
>> It was my favorite, but I'm on vacation now and difficult to update the w=
iki from my phone...
>=20
> enjoy your vacation
>=20
> Juergen
>=20
>>=20
>> - Simon
>>=20
>>=20
>> =B7=A2=D7=D4=CE=D2=B5=C4 iPhone
>>=20
>> =D4=DA 2012-6-21=A3=AC7:54=A3=ACDe Bin Lei <leidb@apache.org> =D0=B4=B5=C0=
=A3=BA
>>=20
>>> Juergen, thank for your comments, now the criteria is more clear, thanks=

>>> again.
>>>=20
>>> 2012/6/21 J=A8=B9rgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@googlemail.com>
>>>=20
>>>> On 6/21/12 5:51 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>>>> I think safety is of high value.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> That includes security issues and also data loss/corruption.  The last=

>>>> includes crashers that result in unrecoverable loss of work.  Hidden lo=
ss
>>>> of work and document corruption that does not appear until the document=
 is
>>>> opened later is particularly serious.
>>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> We used in general the following criteria (details where we are more
>>>> less based on can be foud under [2])
>>>>=20
>>>> - crashes (including data loss/corruption)
>>>> - security fixes
>>>> - regressions
>>>>=20
>>>> I would also include
>>>> - memory leaks
>>>> when a fix is available and it is well tested that nothing else breaks
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> - maintenance issues (like updating reference type library, version
>>>> strings, images, ...)
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> A micro release like 3.4.1 is only for fixing serious problems and not
>>>> to introduce new features. Excepting new translations.
>>>>=20
>>>> Minor releases, eg. 3.5, can include any kind of fix, features and
>>>> improvements. Bigger UI changes should be discussed and probably better=

>>>> included in a major release.
>>>>=20
>>>> See also [1] and especially [2]
>>>>=20
>>>> We should update these pages on demand to reflect our guideline how we
>>>> want handle this in the future. A common understanding is of course
>>>> important here.
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> Juergen
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria
>>>> [2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Stopper
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>> - Dennis
>>>>>=20
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: dongjun zong [mailto:zongdj001@gmail.com]
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 20:31
>>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
>>>>>=20
>>>>> I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related
>>>> issue
>>>>> should be considered as release blocker.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> 2012/6/21 Ji Yan <yanji.yj@gmail.com>
>>>>>=20
>>>>>> =46rom my point of view, security and high usability issue should be s=
et
>>>> as
>>>>>> blocker
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> 2012/6/21 debin lei <leidb@apache.org>
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Hi, All
>>>>>>> I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1
>>>> release
>>>>>>> blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for th=
e
>>>>>>> release blocker?
>>>>>>> Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio f=
rom
>>>>>> dev
>>>>>>> view ?
>>>>>>> I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
>>>>>>> So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things=

>>>> more
>>>>>>> clear will be very helpful.
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Best regards.
>>>>>>> Lei De Bin
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Lei De Bin
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>=20
>=20