openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Prud'hommeaux <mprud...@apache.org>
Subject Re: 1.0 steps?
Date Mon, 09 Jul 2007 17:13:15 GMT


> We also need a release manager (a person who will do what Marc and  
> Mike did for 0.9.6 and 0.9.7).

Unless anyone else has a desire to do the 1.0.0 release, I'll  
nominate myself, since I think I have a good idea about the things  
that need to be changed in the build process to accommodate our TLP  
status.



On Jul 9, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:

> I think we need to first go through the list of JIRA issues for  
> 0.9.8 and 1.0.0 and really think hard about whether they should be  
> fixed or not.
>
> We also need a release manager (a person who will do what Marc and  
> Mike did for 0.9.6 and 0.9.7).
>
> Maybe we should post the list of proposed deferred JIRA issues for  
> discussion and then move them. I like the idea of defining both a  
> 1.0.1 and 1.1.0 release target to which to defer issues.
>
> I think once there is consensus on the non-deferred issues and an  
> identified JIRA owner for them, the release manager can propose  
> when to make a branch. Once the branch is cut, fixes would have to  
> be made in both branch and trunk, so it's not a trivial decision.
>
> Maybe a wiki with a table of JIRA issues and proposed target  
> release and some justification (with author's name) would be  
> useful. It's not too hard to set up but still might not be worth  
> the effort.
>
> Craig
>
> On Jul 9, 2007, at 9:50 AM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
>
>>>
>>> What is remaining to get to a 1.0 release? Are there any things in
>>> particular that people think are important to work on? Maybe it's
>>> about time for us to create a branch for 1.0 finalization and
>>> hardening.
>>
>>
>> This probably depends on what our goal is for a 1.0 release.  If  
>> it's just
>> to have a 1.0 release since we graduated to a TLP, then we're  
>> probably close
>> to starting that process.  But, if we are looking for a certain  
>> level and
>> hardness of function, then we still may have a fews things to  
>> clean up.  I'm
>> okay with going for a 1.0 release just to have one, but I would  
>> then like to
>> start working on defining the follow-on release (1.0.1 or 1.1).
>>
>> No matter what type of 1.0 release we decide to go for, maybe we  
>> should
>> incorporate the voting mechanism within JIRA to help determine  
>> what Issues
>> are important?  I am not totally familiar with this process, but  
>> it allows
>> users to vote on the Issues that are most important to them.  Each  
>> user is
>> allowed a certain number of votes (to keep them from voting for "all"
>> Issues).  We can use that as input to our selection criteria.
>>
>> But, before we open up for a vote, do we need some time to review  
>> all of the
>> open Issues and assert 1.0 vs post-1.0?  Something along the lines  
>> of what
>> Patrick did for the previous release?  I just find it kind of  
>> difficult to
>> be working on various problems and then "ding", the timer goes off  
>> and we've
>> cut off development for a given release.  It's probably time to start
>> working out a candidate release cycle and content.
>>
>> Kevin
>
> Craig Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>


Mime
View raw message