[Framework-Team] Re: Re: [plone4] - Initial PLIP drafts coming in
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 06:40:34 -0800, Ricardo Alves wrote: Sorry if I missed some discussion/decision on this, but the place for PLIP submission is now trac? Or are these just drafts that will eventually origin PLIP's at plone.org? There has been some informal discussion here and there, and with Hanno in agreement, we just did it. If there's any opposition to it, I'm happy to have that discussion too — we just moved ahead with it since it was already happening. :) -- Alexander Limi · http://limi.net ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: FWT trac user for CC's that will post trac activity to this list
On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 06:20:34 -0800, Martijn Pieters wrote: It's a pity Trac doesn't support ticket detail changes; there is a plugin for Trac 0.11 that supports this (see http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/DetailedRssFeedPlugin) but dev.plone.org still runs on 0.10. Hopefully not for much longer. :) -- Alexander Limi · http://limi.net ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: PLIPs for milestone 4 and beyond in Trac: occasional conversion from type 'Feature Request'?
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 04:55:34 -0800, Matthew Wilkes wrote: PLIPs have their own numbering and are currently stored exclusively on plone.org. Actually, for 4.0 and later, we're moving them all to Trac. That way, we can assign them to releases, track them separately, and use the update features as a progress log. With the new plone.org setup, the /development area will be Trac, and we'd like to have one roadmap page, not two. Trac is built for development and lightweight release management, so let's use it for what it's good at. :) but I'd not be adverse to moving to trac if we had a smooth migration plan. Migration plan is: Everything in 3.x stays the way it has been (at least for now), for 4.0 — and possibly later releases in the 3.x series — we put PLIPs in Trac. -- Alexander Limi · http://limi.net ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] FWT trac user for CC's that will post trac activity to this list
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 23:52, Ross Patterson wrote: > I just subscribed my RSS reader to the feed for the 4.0 PLIP report and > then added myself as a CC to every ticket in that report so that I can > keep an eye on activity. I'll also have to keep an eye for new tickets > on the feed to make sure I'm on the CC list. It occurred to me that I > would prefer that mail traffic to go through the FWT list. > > We could simply set a policy and say that all PLIPs should have the FWT > list address added to their CC. Would anyone else find this valuable? > Would it cause any problems? Whaddya think? I don't quite see the need to have the FWT subscribed; too much noise for me, the RSS feed gives me enough info. A separate list would be a better idea. It's a pity Trac doesn't support ticket detail changes; there is a plugin for Trac 0.11 that supports this (see http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/DetailedRssFeedPlugin) but dev.plone.org still runs on 0.10. -- Martijn Pieters ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: [plone4] - Initial PLIP drafts coming in
Jens W. Klein wrote: > In your PLIPs you wrote i.e. here https://dev.plone.org/plone/ticket/8593 > to remove parts out of "Plone the Product". I fully agree to remove > features from the core! > > But I think if we do so, there should be a set of "Managed Plone > Products". Important add-ons like LinguaPlone or the removed parts should > get in a "managed by the Plone [Foundation|Team X]" state. [...] > If current teams structure is not sufficient for this task, we could > introduce a new "Add-On Team". I think none of the current teams or structures we have is able to do the job of maintaining a list of recommended / proven / better / whatever list. There have been numerous discussions around this topic and various ideas on how to solve this (community rating, automatic metrics, self-certified criteria, ...) but so far there is neither a consensus nor someone dedicated to own the task. I'd very much welcome if someone would step up for this, but I'm not willing to have this block the removal of unmaintained code anymore ;) Hanno ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
