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
 the.mindstorm.mailinglist@gmail.com designates 64.233.182.189 as permitted
 sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=hUL9Y3CzcxRBJKDMlbimqCj1+vwiKwZbABcVyKF/BGfx3YdJKODqj+h7nzDY+t9jASST2+YFFl7hqUl+JmkuLGkd20R1ilM1Ir5MQmYp1OdNX0xP5d2fZnRaQyt3DKs2qdAP9FkGtwKxh32kTmwzvOhi3AI7FZspUkx69dAl2bk=
Message-ID: <c6f400460702061610m36cb3647mce04c80845da082@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 02:10:00 +0200
From: "Alexandru Popescu" <the.mindstorm.mailinglist@gmail.com>
To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Struts 2.0.5 Quality
In-Reply-To: <8b3ce3790702061524p51bff296mcf1f0b8a637d2005@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <8b3ce3790702051011i32b5c87bs44d2bd1f63d233fd@mail.gmail.com>
	 <45C8E0E7.9000303@fdar.com>
	 <8b3ce3790702061402p79099560r95c3747b26452392@mail.gmail.com>
	 <45C8FCBE.5080209@twdata.org>
	 <8b3ce3790702061524p51bff296mcf1f0b8a637d2005@mail.gmail.com>

I fully agree with Ted's explanation of vote meanings so

> [  ] Leave at test build
> [  ] Alpha
> [ x] Beta
> [  ] General Availability (GA)

./alex
--
.w( the_mindstorm )p.


On 2/7/07, Ted Husted <husted@apache.org> wrote:
> We might have to agree to disagree. I believe a beta vote is warranted
> when someone believes the code is ready for testing outside of the
> development group. Personally, I am not in favor of passing a set of
> bits straight to GA without a beta cycle, especially when a release
> series hasn't seen a GA release yet. The term "General Availability"
> should mean that we feel it is ready for us by the general public, not
> just that we were able to use it ourselves. Of course, other PMC
> members may have different viewpoints.
>
> Remember, voting beta now is not the final disposition. It simply
> means that we can announce the release to the user list and encourage
> wider testing. If the reports come back joyful, then we can decide to
> apply the GA stamp.
>
> In the meantime, we can continue to roll new releases. I'd be happy to
> run one every week or two, so long as there is something to put into
> the notes :)
>
> -Ted.
>
> On 2/6/07, Don Brown <mrdon@twdata.org> wrote:
> > I disagree; you shouldn't vote beta just because you haven't ran the
> > code in production.  A beta vote should be reserved for the case where
> > you don't believe the quality is at the level of a GA release, and there
> > should be specific issues you can point to that you feel need to be
> > resolved first.  If you have downloaded the release, ran it through
> > whatever tests you deem appropriate, and it passes with flying colors,
> > then a GA vote is warranted.
> >
> > Don
> >
> > Ted Husted wrote:
> > > Beta is also an option :)
> > >
> > > On 2/6/07, Ian Roughley <ian@fdar.com> wrote:
> > >> +0 for GA.  I have some testing code that looks good, but no production
> > >> code that has been converted.
> > >>
> > >> /Ian
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>

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