On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 02:27:04PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 03:38:25AM +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 3:34 AM, Eben Eliason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Make sense. Wonder why Michael has been using the rel- prefix?
I attached the 'rel-'
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Erik Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What other kinds of tags including release numbers do you have in mind?
Build numbers, perhaps. But I am more concerned about the fact that
our trac install tracks several projects/subprojects. So I'd propose
xo-8.2.1 or
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 03:38:25AM +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 3:34 AM, Eben Eliason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Make sense. Wonder why Michael has been using the rel- prefix?
I attached the 'rel-' prefix because I think it very likely that we're
going to invent
New milestone created.
Kim
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 03:38:25AM +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 3:34 AM, Eben Eliason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Make sense. Wonder why Michael has been using the rel-
Does this mean that my suggestion to generalize to 8.2.x and 9.1.x
etc. was rejected? I still feel that this could be more useful,
because it would map the milestones to the EOL policy for releases.
That is, anything in the 8.2.x milestone will be dropped when we hit
9.2.0, etc. And, as
Sorry Eben... I didn't mean to reject your suggestion; I guess I don't
quite understand it.
We rename the major releases to 8.2 and 9.1, and what do we do with
the features and bug fixes for 8.1.1?
Kim
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Eben Eliason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does this mean that
I'm not suggesting changes to the release naming at all. I'm arguing
that a ticket slated for 8.1.1 should be in milestone 8.1.x and have a
tag identifying it specifically as 8.1.1
The point is that 8.2.0 (for instance) is a major release milestone,
but we will be supporting these releases for a
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 11:54:44PM -0400, Kim Quirk wrote:
Can we use a combination of milestones and tagging?
Seems like a fine idea to me.
I have the same concerns Kim expressed, so totally agreed on this one.
Marco
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if someone puts 'Groups' into Milestone 9.1.0; you might also tag
it with rel-9.1.0:? because it is undefined and therefore not clear
that can make that milestone without a lot more attention. As it gets
broken down
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if someone puts 'Groups' into Milestone 9.1.0; you might also tag
it with rel-9.1.0:? because it is undefined and therefore not clear
that
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Eben Eliason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The time has come to slog through all of the tickets in trac, to
prioritize the bugs that need to get fixed in the near future, and to
push those that can wait out a bit. I had made it as far as the first
ticket in the
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 09:35:33PM +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Eben Eliason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I began wishing that I could meaningfully differentiate between the
Future release and non-existent Next release components.
Because we are unlikely
Michael,
If we can all agree on tagging and on using exactly the same tags
(which is very difficult); then we still have to deal with the
milestone issue as the entire roadmap and all the past expectations
have been that the milestone DO mean something.
It is difficult to give up on milestones
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 11:54:44PM -0400, Kim Quirk wrote:
Can we use a combination of milestones and tagging?
Seems like a fine idea to me.
Maybe the milestone represents the desired location of the feature,
and the tags represent current expectations as to whether it can make
one release
14 matches
Mail list logo
