reef-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mariia Mykhailova <mamyk...@microsoft.com>
Subject RE: Should we postpone 0.14 release?
Date Mon, 22 Feb 2016 17:32:29 GMT
I've filed REEF-1215 to serve as umbrella JIRA for release 0.15. Boris, feel free to assign
it to yourself, and thanks for volunteering :-)

-Mariia

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Cho [mailto:chobrian@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 10:51 PM
To: dev@reef.apache.org
Subject: Re: Should we postpone 0.14 release?

Thanks Yunseong and Boris :)-Brian

Sent from Outlook Mobile




On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 7:18 PM -0800, "Markus Weimer" <markus@weimo.de> wrote:

+1

Thanks, Boris!

Typed on glass with my thumbs. so please excuse brvt and typso.
On Feb 19, 2016 18:57, "Yunseong Lee"  wrote:

> Thanks everyone for the thoughtful comments! I agree with you all.
>
> Let's stick to the original schedule (REEF-1040 seems to be merged in
> hours!) for 0.14 release.
>
> Also, thanks Boris for volunteering the next release manager!!
>
> Regards,
> Yunseong
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Byung-Gon Chun  wrote:
>
> > Sounds good to me. Thanks.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Boris Shulman
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sure, will do that. So I assume we all agree that we will target 
> > > 0.15 ~
> > two
> > > weeks after 0.14 and it will be mostly driven by the multi-runtime
> > feature.
> > >
> > > Boris.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:45 PM, Markus Weimer
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > That sounds like we have a volunteer for the release manager of 
> > > > 0.15
> :)
> > > >
> > > > Markus
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Boris Shulman
> > > wrote:
> > > > > I agree not to postpone 0.14 but lets target next release it 
> > > > > 2-3
> > weeks.
> > > > I don't mind if we do 0.15 or a minor release.
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: "Byung-Gon Chun" 
> > > > > Sent: ‎2/‎19/‎2016 6:23 PM
> > > > > To: "dev@reef.apache.org" 
> > > > > Subject: Re: Should we postpone 0.14 release?
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with Markus and Julia.
> > > > > Let's not postpone this release.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Julia Wang (QIUHE) < 
> > > > > Qiuhe.Wang@microsoft.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> I agree. For test failure, we have to postpone. For feature,

> > > > >> it
> can
> > > > always
> > > > >> catch next train if our release frequency is reasonable and 
> > > > >> the
> > > feature
> > > > is
> > > > >> not that critical.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I believe we have resolved test failure about 
> > > > >> CanRunClrBridgeExampleOnLocalRuntime which is a E2E test.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Julia
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > > >> From: Markus Weimer [mailto:markus@weimo.de]
> > > > >> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 5:58 PM
> > > > >> To: dev@reef.apache.org
> > > > >> Subject: Re: Should we postpone 0.14 release?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hi,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I'm against postponing releases. It just turns into a 
> > > > >> never-ending
> > > story
> > > > >> of postponements. Each release (even minor ones) have the 
> > > > >> same
> > effort
> > > > for
> > > > >> us. Given that this one would be driven by a new feature, why

> > > > >> not
> > aim
> > > > for a
> > > > >> quick turnaround to 0.15? That way, we could also remove a 
> > > > >> lot of
> > code
> > > > we
> > > > >> recently deprecated soon as well.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Markus
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Byung-Gon Chun
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Byung-Gon Chun
> >
>





Mime
View raw message