Mailing-List: contact dev-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of mfncooper@gmail.com designates
 66.249.92.169 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=DZYTcZLBlEWNNHX9VLdhjzoXJNald+pFVq1Hq7hKLDFMbjkgjoTjJ6M4TmYJK5tdX0Wut8MnpVeqWQPu80zn7oIPh5QDhSuuDboBjKbRZMRwHHnnSFCKd071C1KOq/Xy7tzNaj2z53lvNBh07I3EEha1IEEa+0Z3jGMIUFHo6UE=
Message-ID: <16d6c6200702191154g7381c2a4k6c812dc3ee345d15@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 11:54:14 -0800
From: "Martin Cooper" <martinc@apache.org>
Sender: mfncooper@gmail.com
To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Subject: Re: s1 - 1.x "Future" Issues
In-Reply-To: <b9e663070702191139v1149852ah2c639d2b1cac15fb@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_56632_5253075.1171914854265"
References: <45D63C5C.7060201@apache.org>
	 <8b3ce3790702181655g7a8f2d07w7127c4be2a6d5fbc@mail.gmail.com>
	 <45D91367.2090909@apache.org>
	 <8b3ce3790702190523n365c7ef9x240604cb703d83fa@mail.gmail.com>
	 <16d6c6200702190951p4152d3bel1fd43ac38fb2dbb7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <b9e663070702191139v1149852ah2c639d2b1cac15fb@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_56632_5253075.1171914854265
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On 2/19/07, Paul Benedict <pbenedict@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Ted,
>
> I was hoping that it would be obvious that version 1.x or whatever is
> sooner
> than Future :-) So when I talk about Future being on the horizon, yes, the
> issues have been reviewed and the ticket is viable, but it's not slated
> for
> the near future.
>
> However, what about tickets that are reviewed but there's no current
> interest in addressing them? That's the main problem here. Because as long
> as the bug isn't invalid, we could suck all the issues into Future.
> However,
> that totally defeats the purpose of the road map if there are 400 issues
> being listed as "Future".


Why does it defeat the purpose of the roadmap? The "Future" tag means "valid
issue but not yet assigned to a specific release". Once someone elects to
fix an issue, then it should be assigned a specific release label instead of
Future. Paul, all this is in the archives from when this process was
defined, about a year and a half ago.

--
Martin Cooper


I am looking for direction here: If it is is up to me, I am re-reviewing the
> 30-some Future tickets and re-assigning them back to Unknown if there's no
> good chance they are going to be addressed in this or the next major
> release. They've been siting around for a very long time. So I'd like to
> know what SHOULD be done? You know my preference.
>
> Paul
>

------=_Part_56632_5253075.1171914854265--