Re: Reopened CONNECTORS-148; should we spin an RC9?
Just my opinion: 1. release the artifacts that are voted on... its 0.1 and a lot of people will likely be still in evaluation stage (likely with derby?). Obviously there are bugs, even ones that aren't known, but I think its just fine to release with known bugs... better at this stage to get the release out there and possibly draw in more people (who might find more bugs). 2. start working on the next release. besides this bug, for example there is the related issue open for improved postgresql testing, etc: personally I think this is great, maybe expanding on that idea could uncover even more bugs. the known bugs are documented in jira anyway, but workarounds or whatever could be put in the wiki in the meantime too. I don't think the next release needs to be rushed out to fix the bug quickly, either. Its not the end of the world at this point if people hit the bug and are drawn into mailing lists/svn/jira/whatever On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: There is a workaround, but given the fact that a complex workaround is needed to execute what should be a simple deployment, I'd wonder if we have our priorities straight in releasing 0.1 in this condition. But it's your call. The release process is easy for me, except the pain needed to get everyone to have a look at the artifact and sign off on it, and I can see no particular rush either. If we do have another RC, I would also like to add Postgresql-based tests into RC9. I've got them just about ready, and will be committing to trunk shortly. Karl On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.org wrote: Is there a workaround for the issue? Can't the user create it by hand? On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:51 AM, Karl Wright wrote: You can read the details in CONNECTORS-148. I hesitate to ask this because getting the votes for RC8 just finished, and took the better part of a month, but should we produce an RC9? This issue was considered a blocker for release, and since it appears to not have been fixed, I really think we have no choice. Effectively this prevents people from using PostgreSQL with ManifoldCF, unless they take manual measures, and I doubt many people will be willing to do that. Karl
Re: Reopened CONNECTORS-148; should we spin an RC9?
+1. release the artifacts that are voted on. Koji (11/02/01 10:15), Robert Muir wrote: Just my opinion: 1. release the artifacts that are voted on... its 0.1 and a lot of people will likely be still in evaluation stage (likely with derby?). Obviously there are bugs, even ones that aren't known, but I think its just fine to release with known bugs... better at this stage to get the release out there and possibly draw in more people (who might find more bugs). 2. start working on the next release. besides this bug, for example there is the related issue open for improved postgresql testing, etc: personally I think this is great, maybe expanding on that idea could uncover even more bugs. the known bugs are documented in jira anyway, but workarounds or whatever could be put in the wiki in the meantime too. I don't think the next release needs to be rushed out to fix the bug quickly, either. Its not the end of the world at this point if people hit the bug and are drawn into mailing lists/svn/jira/whatever On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Karl Wrightdaddy...@gmail.com wrote: There is a workaround, but given the fact that a complex workaround is needed to execute what should be a simple deployment, I'd wonder if we have our priorities straight in releasing 0.1 in this condition. But it's your call. The release process is easy for me, except the pain needed to get everyone to have a look at the artifact and sign off on it, and I can see no particular rush either. If we do have another RC, I would also like to add Postgresql-based tests into RC9. I've got them just about ready, and will be committing to trunk shortly. Karl On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Grant Ingersollgsing...@apache.org wrote: Is there a workaround for the issue? Can't the user create it by hand? On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:51 AM, Karl Wright wrote: You can read the details in CONNECTORS-148. I hesitate to ask this because getting the votes for RC8 just finished, and took the better part of a month, but should we produce an RC9? This issue was considered a blocker for release, and since it appears to not have been fixed, I really think we have no choice. Effectively this prevents people from using PostgreSQL with ManifoldCF, unless they take manual measures, and I doubt many people will be willing to do that. Karl -- http://www.rondhuit.com/en/
Re: Reopened CONNECTORS-148; should we spin an RC9?
Ok, that's effectively 3 +1's, which is pretty good in this business. If I don't hear any objection, I'll copy the artifact to the download area tomorrow morning. Karl On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Koji Sekiguchi k...@r.email.ne.jp wrote: +1. release the artifacts that are voted on. Koji (11/02/01 10:15), Robert Muir wrote: Just my opinion: 1. release the artifacts that are voted on... its 0.1 and a lot of people will likely be still in evaluation stage (likely with derby?). Obviously there are bugs, even ones that aren't known, but I think its just fine to release with known bugs... better at this stage to get the release out there and possibly draw in more people (who might find more bugs). 2. start working on the next release. besides this bug, for example there is the related issue open for improved postgresql testing, etc: personally I think this is great, maybe expanding on that idea could uncover even more bugs. the known bugs are documented in jira anyway, but workarounds or whatever could be put in the wiki in the meantime too. I don't think the next release needs to be rushed out to fix the bug quickly, either. Its not the end of the world at this point if people hit the bug and are drawn into mailing lists/svn/jira/whatever On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Karl Wrightdaddy...@gmail.com wrote: There is a workaround, but given the fact that a complex workaround is needed to execute what should be a simple deployment, I'd wonder if we have our priorities straight in releasing 0.1 in this condition. But it's your call. The release process is easy for me, except the pain needed to get everyone to have a look at the artifact and sign off on it, and I can see no particular rush either. If we do have another RC, I would also like to add Postgresql-based tests into RC9. I've got them just about ready, and will be committing to trunk shortly. Karl On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Grant Ingersollgsing...@apache.org wrote: Is there a workaround for the issue? Can't the user create it by hand? On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:51 AM, Karl Wright wrote: You can read the details in CONNECTORS-148. I hesitate to ask this because getting the votes for RC8 just finished, and took the better part of a month, but should we produce an RC9? This issue was considered a blocker for release, and since it appears to not have been fixed, I really think we have no choice. Effectively this prevents people from using PostgreSQL with ManifoldCF, unless they take manual measures, and I doubt many people will be willing to do that. Karl -- http://www.rondhuit.com/en/
Reopened CONNECTORS-148; should we spin an RC9?
You can read the details in CONNECTORS-148. I hesitate to ask this because getting the votes for RC8 just finished, and took the better part of a month, but should we produce an RC9? This issue was considered a blocker for release, and since it appears to not have been fixed, I really think we have no choice. Effectively this prevents people from using PostgreSQL with ManifoldCF, unless they take manual measures, and I doubt many people will be willing to do that. Karl
