openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: 1.0 steps?
Date Mon, 09 Jul 2007 17:22:27 GMT
Second the motion!

You did a great job last time around, and unless someone else has a  
burning desire to leap over the cliff with a hankie for a parachute,  
you're it.


On Jul 9, 2007, at 10:13 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:

>> 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 
>> jdo
>> 408 276-5638
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System
408 276-5638
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

View raw message