I'll take are of SOLR-4112 this morning, probably create another JIRA to track unit tests. There aren't any today and I have evidence from the field that it makes DIH usable so....
Erick On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Jack Krupansky <[email protected]>wrote: > The window of Monday through Wednesday sounds like a great target. Nothing > says that the first RC has to be final. If whoever is doing the branch > wants to do it on Monday rather than Tuesday, fine. If one or more of these > nasty "blockers" gets fixed on Tuesday, we should still be open to a > re-spin to put quality over a mere day or two of delay. But draw a hard > line on Wednesday. > > -- Jack Krupansky > > -----Original Message----- From: Mark Miller > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 3:36 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: 4.1 release > > > Saying tomorrow without any date that gives anyone any time to do anything > is out of nowhere to me. People in Europe and east of that will wake up and > find out, oh today. While pressure has been building towards a release, no > one has proposed a date for a cutoff. I think that is always only fair. I > think that if you were desperate to cut off to blockers tomorrow, you > should have called for that last week. > > Robert Muir's short term releases are not threatened by allowing people to > plan and execute a release together. You can take that too far and do > damage from the opposite direction. Giving people time to tie things up > with a real deadline is only fair. We all know a nebulous deadline is not > conducive to finishing up work. > > I think all releases should have a known date that we agree on that gives > developers some time to finish what they are working on or what they > believe is important for the release. At a minimum there should be a few > days for this. A weekend involved only seems fair. This doesn't have to be > a long time, but it should not require we file blockers and just seems like > a friendly way to develop together. > > Monday is fine by me if others buy into it. > > Otherwise, we have taken 4 or 5 months for 4.1. Let's not drag it out > another month. But let's not do the reverse and release it tonight. The > sensible approach always seems like we should plan out some target dates on > the list - dates that actually give devs a chance to respond to - and then > follow through on those dates. > > - Mark > > On Jan 10, 2013, at 3:26 PM, Steve Rowe <[email protected]> wrote: > > Okay - I can see your logic, Mark, but this is not even close to out of >> nowhere. You yourself have been vocal about making a 4.1 release for a >> couple weeks now. >> >> I agree with Robert Muir that we should be promoting short turnaround >> releases. If it doesn't make this release, it'll make the next one, which >> will come out in a relatively short span of time. In this model, Blocker >> issues are the drivers, not "Fix Version". If people want stuff in the >> release, they should mark their issue as Blocker. >> >> How about a compromise - next Monday we branch and only allow Blockers to >> block the release? >> >> Steve >> >> On Jan 10, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Mark Miller <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> -1 from me - I don't like not giving people a target date to clean >>> things up by. No one has given a proposed date to try and tie things up by >>> - just calling 'hike is tomorrow' out of nowhere doesn't seem right to me. >>> >>> We have a lot of people working on this over a lot of timezones. I think >>> we should do the right thing and give everyone at least a few days and a >>> weekend to finish getting their issues into 4.1. >>> >>> - Mark >>> >>> On Jan 10, 2013, at 2:36 PM, Steve Rowe <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I'd like to start sooner than next Tuesday. >>>> >>>> I propose to make the branch tomorrow, and only allow Blocker issues to >>>> hold up the release after that. >>>> >>>> A release candidate should then be possible by the middle of next week. >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> On Jan 10, 2013, at 2:27 PM, Mark Miller <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 10, 2013, at 2:12 PM, Steve Rowe <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to release soon. What else blocks this? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think we should toss out a short term date (next tuesday?) for >>>>> anyone to get in what they need for 4.1. >>>>> >>>>> Then just consider blockers after branching? >>>>> >>>>> Then release? >>>>> >>>>> Objections, better ideas? >>>>> >>>>> I think we should give a bit of time for people to finish up what's in >>>>> flight or fix any blockers. Then we should heighten testing and allow for >>>>> any new blockers, and then kick it out. If we need to do a 4.2 shortly >>>>> after, so be it. >>>>> >>>>> - Mark >>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------** >>>>> --------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>>> [email protected].**org<[email protected]> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------** >>>> --------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>> [email protected].**org<[email protected]> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>> >>> ------------------------------**------------------------------** >>> --------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>> [email protected].**org<[email protected]> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >>> >> >> ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> [email protected].**org<[email protected]> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [email protected].**org<[email protected]> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [email protected].**org<[email protected]> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
