Aren't there any unit tests to point people to?On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Cédric Champeau <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:The problem is how to get feedback if the feature is not documented?2016-03-13 18:13 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Laforge <email@example.com>:For a beta, I think it can be okay, but for the final release of 2.5, documentation will be of course mandatory, and we can't release it without that documentation. As I often say, a feature which is not documented doesn't exist!On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Shil Sinha <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:I think it's a bit of a problem, still, when it's really that particular feature which is in beta, and that we'll want users to test. Without knowing it's there and how to use it it's going to be hard to have feedback.Agreed, it would be strange to not have any documentation for the focal point of a release. Are there any external references which we could direct users to? Not from within the repo itself, but when promoting the release elsewhere e.g. Twitter.On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Cédric Champeau <email@example.com> wrote:So does everyone agree that we should release the beta even if it's missing docs for macros? I think it's a bit of a problem, still, when it's really that particular feature which is in beta, and that we'll want users to test. Without knowing it's there and how to use it it's going to be hard to have feedback.2016-03-13 0:56 GMT+01:00 Suderman Keith <firstname.lastname@example.org>:On Mar 12, 2016, at 12:17 PM, Guillaume Laforge <email@example.com> wrote:Let's go with mushroom, for a change :-)+1On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Cédric Champeau <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:2016-03-12 0:05 GMT+01:00 Nicholas Grealy <email@example.com>:Looks like it's just you and me, Pascal!Just some questions for the broader dev community:
- Who can perform the release? - Cédric looked like he single handedly pushed out version 2.4.6 - can we ask him to prepare the 2.5 beta release?Until we've switched to a new release process, it's still easier if I do it, yes.
- Is there anything outstanding for a 2.5 beta release? - Whoever's we're waiting on, can we get an update?There are lots of outstanding issues, that's why it's a beta. In particular, the new (exciting!) macro stuff is not documented, nor the AST matcher complete. It's a super nice feature that deserves polishing. Plus, there are some decisions to be made with regards to applying the global `macro` AST xform globally or not, in particular with groovy-all. We can solve this after the beta, for sure, but we need to think about it.
- Do we need a VOTE thread for a beta release?Yes, it's a release. We can call it "beta", "rc" or "mushroom", it's a release anyway :)Cheers!
- Kind regards,NickOn Mon, 7 Mar 2016 at 22:52 Nicholas Grealy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
+1On Sun, 6 Mar 2016 20:37 Pascal Schumacher <email@example.com> wrote:Hello everybody,
as far as I remember there was wide support for releasing a 2.5 beta in
the "Release 2.4.6 and 2.5.0-beta?" discussion.
The release announcement for 2.4.6 contained the sentence "... be
prepared for a 2.5.0-beta release soon!". Tomorrow that will be two
weeks ago, so I think we should make some plans when we start the
release vote and who will be able to serve as a release manager.
What do you think?
Department of Computer Science