Weekly meeting sounds. I can also help with porting things to 6.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 8:27 AM andrea boriero <and...@hibernate.org> wrote: > > Agree a meeting is a good idea especially when there are fixes that are not > easily portable to 6, as pointed out by Steve I think/hope that most of the > fixes will be easily ported by simply cherry-picking them. > > On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 17:56, Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org> wrote: > > > I would not even put it on Gail specifically per-se from the 5.x side. > > Really we just need to be able to identify what fixes done on 5.x need to > > be ported across to 6. And then, depending on the complexity, I would > > expect some help from the person who implemented the fix in 5 porting that > > change to 6 - most of the time, I'd expect to just apply those changes > > myself (or Andrea or Chris). > > > > I think a meeting is a good idea > > > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 10:09 AM Guillaume Smet <guillaume.s...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Sorry for not replying earlier, got very busy on other things. > > > > > > So, now that we agree, how do we do things? I think we should have a > > > weekly meeting at a fixed time to discuss master -> 6, probably either > > with > > > Andrea or Chris. > > > > > > I could do it for a few months if it helps but in the end, I think it > > > should be Gail for 5.x + whoever volunteers for the 6 part. > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:56 PM Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org> > > wrote: > > > > > >> I completely agree with everything you say. A few thoughts in-line... > > >> > > >> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 12:37 PM Guillaume Smet < > > guillaume.s...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> == What to do then > > >>> > > >> > > >>> There are a couple of options: > > >>> 1/ no workaround, then we should consider it for 5.x > > >>> > > >> > > >> If it is fixed in 5 then it should be fixed in 6 as well. Either it is > > >> no longer a problem or because we port the fix from 5 to 6. Not saying > > >> exactly how that happens - just that that needs to be the end result. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>> 2/ there is a viable workaround, we can postpone it to 6, but we > > >>> definitely would need to have something to mark them as we need to fix > > them > > >>> (a version, maybe, or a tag?) - one thing is that it would probably be > > a > > >>> good idea to categorize things a bit because when you revisit > > something for > > >>> 6, it would be a good idea to have the existing bugs in mind as it > > could > > >>> influence the design. > > >>> > > >> > > >> Using a tag seems enticing, but experience tells me that won't really > > >> have the effect I think you want. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>> * if it's something we want to fix in 6, there might be several > > options: > > >>> 2.1/ we can already fix it in 6 because the features are already > > >>> implemented > > >>> 2.2/ we can't fix it right now > > >>> > > >>> IMHO, we should start considering taking into account 2.1/ into the > > >>> daily work for 6 if we want to make this work as otherwise we will end > > up > > >>> with a very big pile of bugs when 6 finally gets finalized. > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >>> > > >>> As for 2.2/, we should really have a way to keep track of them and push > > >>> them to case 2.1/ when we can. Note that it's the same case if it's > > more an > > >>> improvement but we consider it as something we want: if we want it, we > > >>> should find a way to keep track of it somehow. > > >>> > > >>> That also means that we would need someone familiar with 6 to help > > >>> triaging the issues. IMHO, this can be done once a week, if done > > regularly > > >>> and steadily. > > >>> > > >>> If we continue fixing bugs, even in 6 only, that still says to the > > >>> contributor "we hear you, we are improving". If we just stop fixing > > bugs > > >>> until 6 is more or less feature-complete, then we send a very bad > > message > > >>> IMHO. And we will end up with a pile of unfixed issues in the > > bugtracker > > >>> that we won't really be able to deal with. And less users. > > >>> > > >> > > >> Alpha1 just released the fix for HHH-37. Yep, that's right 37 - the > > 37th > > >> issue ever since we moved to Jira. We *do* keep improving ;) And > > that's > > >> just one of the many. > > >> > > >> But yes your point is valid. It is very important to keep fixing bugs. > > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > hibernate-dev mailing list > > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
