On 4/28/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That makes sense, especially since we don't have an RC quality option. I wonder if we should add it, because there should be a way to indicate the code is pretty complete, stable, and free of major bugs, but at the same time, it isn't GA and is missing key ingredients like documentation and minor bug fixings.
Again, to me, a "Release Candidate" is a distribution that we think we could vote onto GA without change, if wider testing does not uncover any "showstoppers". It's a candidate for a GA release. Sure, the binary might be "code complete" and "production ready" (or not I haven't sorted through the thirty open issues), but that doesn't make the distribution "ready for prime time". Of course, the binaries in our builds are usually production ready. Many people have been using the nightly build in production for six months or a year. The difference between a build and release is that we've included all the other "key ingredients" we need to turn an entree into a meal. :) -Ted.
Don > > But, that's OK. I'm not the only one with a vote, and no one can veto > a release :) > >> >> Don >> >> Ted Husted wrote: >> > +1 Alpha >> > >> > As Don mentioned, some of the documenation is patchy. There are things >> > like references to Bugzilla. The links to the "Components", like >> > Extras, need to be fleshed out, the "Core" link is useless, and we >> > need some introductory text for Taglibs. >> > >> > I might have some time to work on this Monday afternoon, if no one >> > beats me to it. >> > >> >> There are a few outstanding bugs in JIRA that should be addressed in >> >> the next release. >> > >> > Could you add the bugs you have in mind to the 1.3.2 release plan as >> > "known issues"? Or, start a 1.3.3 plan that itemizes these. There are >> > 28 open bugs in JIRA now, though I think some of these could be >> > reclassified. But at first glance, 28 is 28 too many for anything >> > except an Alpha :) >> > >> > -Ted. >> > >> > On 4/27/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> The first Action 1 release since the recent reorganization, we have a >> >> Struts Action Framework 1.3.2 build to evaluate for release quality. >> >> The release plan is available on the wiki: >> >> >> >> http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsActionRelease132 >> >> <http://wiki.apache.org/struts/ShaleRelease102> >> >> >> >> the Struts Action Framework v1.3.2 test build has been completed and >> >> deployed to >> >> >> >> http://svn.apache.org/dist/struts/action/v1.3.2 >> >> <http://svn.apache.org/dist/struts/shale/v1.0.2/> >> >> >> >> In my testing, I found the following issues: >> >> 1. Struts faces example webapps both don't work >> >> 2. Taglib integration tests don't work >> >> >> >> Otherwise, all the example applications worked correctly. >> >> >> >> Once you have had a chance to review this test build, please respond >> >> with a vote on its quality: >> >> >> >> [ ] Alpha >> >> [ ] Beta >> >> [ ] General Availability (GA) >> >> >> >> We welcome votes from all community members, however, only the votes >> >> of Struts PMC members are binding. >> >> >> >> My vote is for Beta quality, as there are no unreleased dependencies, >> >> all the key example apps work correctly, and I've personally had the >> >> 1.3.x code in production for over six months without any >> problems. Only >> >> Beta because the docs need work and there are a few outstanding >> bugs in >> >> JIRA that should be addressed in the next release.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
