On Feb 6, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > Hi Suresh, > > Great enthusiasm and good job putting the below email together. > > Since we are still VOTE'ing on 0.2 and since there are limited > mentor cycles (and developer cycles), do you think we should try > and push for a 0.3 release so quickly (even before the 0.2 release > has been made?). > > If so, and you have the energy, I'll try and help but you may want > to wait and see how 0.2 goes because there are steps (some which > take 48hrs+ after a successful VOTE) that need to be done to > finalize the release. Hi Chris,
I have a feeling we are curbing developer enthusiasm and energy while we get the releases right. So I am trying to keep the momentum going through. The solution I propose is, when we think we are ready with a release branch it and move forward. I am fully aware of the overhead we will be adding to merge them, I am volunteering to ensure all branches will sync up by the time we catch up with release cycles. Suresh > > Cheers, > Chris > > On Feb 6, 2012, at 7:01 AM, Suresh Marru wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> While we working through release semantics on the 0.2-incubating-snapshot >> branch, the trunk moved quite significantly. Great job from every one in >> marching ahead. I think we are in a good position for an immediate >> 0.3-incubating release. Any thoughts or objections to this plan? >> >> I see the following feature additions since 0.2 is branched in december: >> >> * Grid submissions to supercomputers are now working for basic applications. >> * Registry and workflow launching now have cool API's so web interfaces can >> be built against. >> * User interface have been improved but this looks like work in progress. >> * Workflows now have For-Each iterative support, looks like there are open >> tickets on this issues, but workable within this week. >> * Registry is now persisting state information from workflow launches and >> progress >> * Workflows have provenance aware capabilities so the execution begins from >> the mid workflow where data is available. >> >> Please add/modify to the list, but I see these are significant improvements >> mandating a release. I propose the following release preparation for 0.3: >> * Since there are enough features already call a feature freeze immediately. >> * Wrap up any changes to these features, test document and make a code >> freeze by Friday 02/10 >> * Make a release over next weekend. >> >> This plan assumes the current voting 0.2 release goes through. If we find >> blockers in 0.2, I still suggest to stick to 0.3 release plan, branch it and >> let the trunk move forward. I am getting bothered with trunk advancing too >> much without a release. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Cheers, >> Suresh > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. > Senior Computer Scientist > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA > Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 > Email: [email protected] > WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department > University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
