+1 On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Oliver Deakin <oliver.dea...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 20/01/2010 11:18, Mark Hindess wrote: >> >> In message<4d9fb1a01001200154u780476d6k570d6bb3516ba...@mail.gmail.com>, >> Ray >> Chen writes: >> >>> >>> Hi Mark, >>> >>> I have a question, what conditions should java6 satisfy so that we can >>> release it? >>> >> >> We'll follow the same process as we do for java5/trunk. >> >> >>> >>> All the tests passed? :) >>> >> >> That would be nice, but we don't hold the java5 releases to that >> standard so I see no reason to apply it to java6. >> > > Agreed - I think getting the M1 for java6 into a position where we can agree > that the failing tests are not blockers for release is really what we're > aiming for. I've just had a look in JIRA at the bugs targeted for 6.0M1 and > I only see 1 result, HARMONY-6330. One thing that I think is important for > us to get the M1 release out the door is to have a realistic set of bugs in > JIRA to represent the current state of the build and I don't think that is > true at the moment. I'm rerunning the 6.0 tests on the latest federated > build - I'll post the results here once I have them and I aim to raise JIRAs > for all the failures (and fix some if I can) so we have a reasonable view of > what is required to reach M1. > > Regards, > Oliver > >> Regards, >> -Mark >> >> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Mark Hindess >>> <mark.hind...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Since we are not making much progress towards a java6 milestone release >>>> and the code has been frozen for much too long, I think we should >>>> abandon the idea and postpone the release until we do the next java5 >>>> milestone. >>>> >>>> If no one speaks up against this, then I will send a mail declaring the >>>> code freeze over tomorrow. >>>> >>>> I'm not convinced having the milestones offset by a week really helps >>>> much and suggest that next time we do a milestone release for java5 we >>>> do a java6 release at the same time. =A0(I'm not convinced this will >>>> work >>>> either but it can't really be worse so I think we should try it.) >>>> >>>> What do you think? >>>> >>>> -Mark. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> --=20 >>> Regards, >>> >>> Ray Chen >>> >>> >> >> >> > > -- > Oliver Deakin > Unless stated otherwise above: > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number > 741598. > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU > >
-- Regards, Ray Chen
