On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 12:28:08PM -0400, Dan Scott wrote: > On May 24, 2012 12:19 PM, "Lazar, Alexey Vladimirovich" < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > Generally, I think all contributed code should go through the equal > review procedures and not specially prioritized, unless we are talking > about critical fixes, but can be decided on a case-by-case basis or > whatever the current process. I think keeping with release schedule is most > important. I would rather see GSCO or any other code or feature come in a > later release, but properly reviewed, tested and documented. > > +1
+1 > > > > 1. Don't let it affect the schedule. Any GSOC code that is completed > early enough to make the cut, get reviewed, and merged is included in 2.3. > Otherwise, it waits in the pool for the 2013-03 release along with the > rest of the un-merged community code. > > > > Yes. > > I would prefer to keep the schedule as is. +1 IIRC, there was a +1 from Galen in IRC as well. Given the lack of objection, I'll consider this case closed. The release schedule stands. Thanks, -b -- Bill Erickson | Senior Software Developer | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source | phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: [email protected] | web: http://esilibrary.com
