Mailing-List: contact tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ant.elder@gmail.com designates
 64.233.162.235 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=YPPBaT2WElWSuxJCocs3bgGV2PsAX2HRK05c+JqKgZUsw5PK7/GZaP/VpbdcImC8Yo1D/rRV2L3qvw/wm6IChN6DnfisOir7oGp8ulFPu08+8Gka00EQ1zu/TpzX1nQ0J4ngjhnFT5OX+31Tj6h0imCU/PVOzgLMguB6pmzDs9M=
Message-ID: <71e1b5740801021037i5f71cd7eu5b0b6855a895578d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 18:37:10 +0000
From: "ant elder" <antelder@apache.org>
Reply-To: ant.elder@gmail.com
Sender: ant.elder@gmail.com
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: R1.1. Status - was: Outstanding JIRA,, release 1.1 and Quality
In-Reply-To: <c0c051b50801020904s1c149156p410b924e308b125a@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_6215_14790232.1199299030403"
References: <c0c051b50801020611s660b2d4dx1a0d814226dcaa71@mail.gmail.com>
	 <71e1b5740801020620u316ac6f7hafb67846361ceda3@mail.gmail.com>
	 <c0c051b50801020904s1c149156p410b924e308b125a@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_6215_14790232.1199299030403
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On Jan 2, 2008 5:04 PM, Simon Laws <simonslaws@googlemail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 2, 2008 2:20 PM, ant elder <ant.elder@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 2, 2008 2:11 PM, Simon Laws <simonslaws@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Dec 20, 2007 10:07 PM, Simon Laws <simonslaws@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > As an experiment I looked down the first page of the outstanding bug
> > > list
> > > > [1] allocating to release 1.1 those bugs that I believed should be
> > > fixed.
> > > > I was looking for the sort of thing which showed a failure of some
> > > feature
> > > > of Tuscany, didn't obviously have a work round and that wasn't
> > obviously
> > > > some kind of enhancement from what we have already. Difficult to
> apply
> > > this
> > > > consistently and I'm sure we would all come up with different lists.
> > Non
> > > the
> > > > less I came up with 9 JIRA on the page of 50 (I moved some others as
> > I'm
> > > > trying to address as many of the release build related bugs as I
> can.
> > > I'm
> > > > not counting them for this purpose). Just be multiplying that up for
> > the
> > > > remaining pages that gives us over 30 must fixes before 1.1.  So if
> > you
> > > > are planning to work on the release during the rest of the year
> please
> > > use
> > > > this as a guide.
> > > >
> > > > In reality I know we won't get these all done but we need to ensure
> > 1.1.
> > > > is of suitable quality. Perhaps a more realistic way of looking at
> > this
> > > is
> > > > if we we had to do 2 each before we start voting on a release
> > candidate
> > > in
> > > > January which two would they be? I'm working my way though the
> > > (hopefully)
> > > > straightforward release related JIRA but I expect the RC process
> will
> > > raise
> > > > more of these so experience tells us we will have these to deal with
> > > also.
> > > >
> > > > Any thoughts about how we approach this?
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Simon
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=12310210&status=1&status=3&status=4&component=-1&component=12310625&component=12311294&component=12310646&component=12310649&component=12311818&component=12310652&component=12311651&component=12310647&component=12310952&component=12311790&component=12311980&component=12311785&component=12311645&component=12311586&component=12311583&component=12310648&component=12311793&component=12311650&component=12310921&component=12311792&component=12311791&component=12311648&component=12311890&component=12310651&component=12310800&component=12311649&component=12310650&component=12310801&component=12311647&component=12311910&component=12310644&component=12311354&component=12310590&component=12310642&fixfor=-1&fixfor=-2&fixfor=12312358&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=DESC
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > As you may have noticed I've just moved over the rest of the easy JIRA
> > > that
> > > relate to samples for 1.1 and that mostly got deferred last time
> round.
> > > These are primarily README type fixes and take little effort to either
> > fix
> > > or discount so I'll get on with them. I've still not had any feedback
> on
> > > how
> > > people feel about the harder technical JIRA that remain outstanding.
> > >
> > > Currently I'm waiting for a few things before I can potentially cut
> the
> > > branch. In particular,
> > >
> > > JMS
> > > Venkat's last policy changes (he's committed but there may be a few
> > > adjustments to make)
> > > Some help with the Saxon dependency
> > >
> > > This means the formal branch won't happen for a couple of days yet.
> > > However,
> > >
> > >
> > > Should we get some more of the outstanding JIRA fixed for 1.1?
> > > If so which ones (I moved some of the likely candidates to 1.1 before
> > > Christmas but not all), i.e. who is going to do what ?
> > >
> > > Personally there are a couple of domain related JIRAs I want to fix
> but
> > I
> > > need to know from everyone whether I should go ahead and cut the
> branch
> > > (once I'm in a position to do so) or whether we are going to spend
> some
> > > time
> > > fixing JIRA.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Simon
> > >
> >
> > Does taking the branch have to wait for JMS? I'm a little behind so it
> may
> > be a day or two before the binding is in a releasable state but the
> branch
> > could still happen now and I'll can just copy over any changes.
> >
> >   ...ant
> >
> Ant
>
> Can I ask what version of Active MQ the new code will be using?
>
> Simon
>


Its on 4.1.1 presently but as 5.0 is the latest i'd been thinking about
moving up to that.

   ...ant

------=_Part_6215_14790232.1199299030403--