struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Frank W. Zammetti" <fzli...@omnytex.com>
Subject Re: Struts release process is broken (Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality)
Date Sun, 14 May 2006 18:03:35 GMT
Unless I'm mistaken, the votes I've always seen come up have three 
choices: mark a release alpha, beta or GA.  This would seem to be the 
cause of the "problem" with the process to me because it in effect 
allows the process to be "short circuited", i.e., a newly-rolled release 
could be marked GA immediately if that's what the vote result was.  This 
is, I think, what your saying Ted.

I think the "fix" is to simply have a number of separate votes in 
sequence, and to make this a known sequence that each release follows.

For instance, we start with a 1.3.0 to begin with, and it is marked 
alpha (not sure if that needs to be voted on).  At some point in time 
after that, someone decides that they think it's good enough to be beta 
now, so a vote is called and the choices are (a) beta or (b) stay at 
alpha.  Likewise, when someone thinks a beta is good enough for GA, a 
similar vote is called with only two choices, GA or stay beta.  None of 
these votes can be called unless the previous one was done.  It's 
conceivable you could go from alpha to GA in a few days with this 
procedure, so it really isn't adding any extra impediment to GA I think.

Each release can be distributed as far and wide as you want, and in fact 
should be, to get as many people testing as possible.

Frank

Ted Husted wrote:
> On 5/14/06, Wendy Smoak <wsmoak@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'd rather not re-introduce the term "release candidate" at this
>> point, especially not in combination with 'Beta'.  Under our current
>> guidelines, a Beta *is* a release.
> 
> And, so is an Alpha. And we can distribute any release - Alpha, Beta,
> or GA -- as hard and wide as we like.
> 
> Then, after distributing the release as a Beta, if no significant
> issues turn up, we can mark the same distribution as GA. In effect,
> every release is a release candidate, because every release could be
> upgraded to GA, should circumstances warrant.
> 
> But, we should *not* even be thinking about marking a distribution GA
> until it has been distributed as a public Beta first. That's the part
> of the process that's been broken lately.
> 
> -Ted.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 

-- 
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
AIM: fzammetti
Yahoo: fzammetti
MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
Java Web Parts -
http://javawebparts.sourceforge.net
Supplying the wheel, so you don't have to reinvent it!

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org


Mime
View raw message