Hello koha-devel,
I have some points to rise about our release process.
Koha 3.8 has been released 2.5 months ago, and some libraries have
reported major problems with 3.8.0. The main origin of those problems
came from the fact that a large feature (hourly loans) has been pushed
close to the relea
Hi Paul, all,
> * Release the 3.X.0 saying it's a beta, could have some bugs not detected.
> The 3.X.1 being a RC, and the 3.X.2 being the 1st really stable version.
+1 for this second option. You could say that it makes more formal what one
could already suspect about a 3.X.0 release.. No real
* Marcel de Rooy (m.de.r...@rijksmuseum.nl) wrote:
> Hi Paul, all,
>
> > * Release the 3.X.0 saying it's a beta, could have some bugs not detected.
> > The 3.X.1 being a RC, and the 3.X.2 being the 1st really stable version.
> +1 for this second option. You could say that it makes more formal wha
xt version.
Katrin
> -Original Message-
> From: koha-devel-boun...@lists.koha-community.org [mailto:koha-devel-
> boun...@lists.koha-community.org] On Behalf Of Chris Cormack
> Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 12:22 PM
> To: Marcel de Rooy
> Cc: koha-devel@lists.koha-community
naming. And whenever we announce freezes - it will always be too early for
> some features and things we wanted to do for this next version.
>
> Katrin
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: koha-devel-boun...@lists.koha-community.org [mailto:koha-devel-
> > boun...@lists.koha-com
gt; boun...@lists.koha-community.org] On Behalf Of Chris Cormack
> > Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 12:22 PM
> > To: Marcel de Rooy
> > Cc: koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org
> > Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] About Release process
> >
> > * Marcel de Rooy (m.de.r...@rij
CC: koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org; Marcel de Rooy
Onderwerp: Re: [Koha-devel] About Release process
I'm mostly in favour of solution 1 (in that it's close to what I think we
should to, and solution 2 is not good in my opinion). But I think there is a
little more to it.
There a
de Rooy
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 1:56 PM
To: Ian Walls; koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org
Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] About Release process
Nothing to say against that, of course :)
Option 1 is/has been our goal, but what actually happened was option 2..
Van: koha-devel-boun
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 06:54:36AM -0500, Elliott Davis wrote:
> I think I too side with option 1.
>
Releases are inherently evil things, (like all deadlines). There is a
temptation always to pack stuff in there to make a release an event. I
dont think having beta releases helps ( or skipping .1 r
Weighing in...
I prefer option 1.
A specific problem is that we tend to test functionality of an
> enhancement not necessarily how that enhancement integrates with the
> eco-system of Koha and its these kind of conflicts that tend not to
> surface until its been deployed in the real world.
>
Thi
Hello -
We have recently hired another Developer (Elliot Davis - libsysguy ;) ),
who is charged with creating a more integrated testing suite for ByWater
and getting/challenging some of our partners to complete testing that isn't
automated already or would be difficult to automate.
As for the opt
Jared:
> Weighing in...
>
> I prefer option 1.
Me too. As soon as x.x.0 comes out, libraries start asking for
upgrades, we exist to provide services they want, so we'd like to give
them that. It's already enough to explain the versioning scheme,
without having numbered releases that aren't usab
Brendan,
I think the thing that I struggle with is the definition of a "Freeze"...
> Please speak up and correct me if I am wrong here. This is what I think it
> means currently - if something has an enhancement bug listed (i.e. the idea
> is out there before the freeze date) - then it could stil
Salvete!
Perhaps no one will notice that I'm commenting from the wrong side of the
marae. >.> <.<
I know I tell this story all the bloody time, and I realise that this is
the Developers' list so imagine me ducking rotten veg.
I agree with Ian's observations. Also, he spelt "favour
Le 12/07/2012 10:53, Paul Poulain a écrit :
> Hello koha-devel,
> I have some points to rise about our release process.
OK, we spoke of this during our IRC meeting. I also spoke of this with
Jared, that applied as RM for 3.12 (he's not elected yet, but I suspect
he will be the only one fool enough
> - branch the release on git. master goes his way for N+1, major ENH
> can be pushed here. N is still controlled by the RM, N-1 controlled by
> the RMaint
I'm not sure I understand this aspect of it. The branching is to allow
enhancements to still be pushed somewhere while what-was-master is
Paul, et. al.,
I just wanted to express my support for this plan on the mailing list.
What I/we plan to do:
> * 2 months before the release (number N) =
> - declare small feature freeze: only bugfixes and small/non-core
> enhancement are pushed for the next release
> - branch the release
Owen,
> - branch the release on git. master goes his way for N+1, major ENH
> > can be pushed here. N is still controlled by the RM, N-1 controlled by
> > the RMaint
>
> I'm not sure I understand this aspect of it. The branching is to allow
> enhancements to still be pushed somewhere while wha
Camins-Esakov
Verzonden: woensdag 18 juli 2012 18:51
Aan: Owen Leonard
CC: koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org
Onderwerp: Re: [Koha-devel] About Release process
Owen,
> - branch the release on git. master goes his way for N+1, major ENH
> can be pushed here. N is still controlled by the
2 10:48
An: koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org
Betreff: Re: [Koha-devel] About Release process
Hi,
I do have [some] doubts too on this double master-approach.
If there is a feature-frozen old-master 3.9 branch and a new master 3.11
branch, where will most developers be spending their time? Wi
Le 19/07/2012 11:12, Fischer, Katrin a écrit :
> Hi all,
Hi all,
> Who will be testing and who will be fixing bugs? I think the problem
> will only get moved a bit in time, but it will still be there. Both
> branches will diverge quickly as soon as patches are only pushed to one
> of them. Then we
On 2 August 2012 20:46, Paul Poulain wrote:
> Le 19/07/2012 11:12, Fischer, Katrin a écrit :
>> Hi all,
> Hi all,
> Moving by 1 month is the best option I can see.
> Could the release of a 3.10.0RC1 -or 3.9.99 the numbering doesn't
> matter-, on Oct 22th please you ? That's an option I could deal
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Chris Cormack wrote:
> On 2 August 2012 20:46, Paul Poulain wrote:
>> Le 19/07/2012 11:12, Fischer, Katrin a écrit :
>>> Hi all,
>> Hi all,
>
>> Moving by 1 month is the best option I can see.
>> Could the release of a 3.10.0RC1 -or 3.9.99 the numbering doesn't
>>
Le 02/08/2012 10:55, Chris Cormack a écrit :
Hi Chris & al,
>> Moving by 1 month is the best option I can see.
>> Could the release of a 3.10.0RC1 -or 3.9.99 the numbering doesn't
>> matter-, on Oct 22th please you ? That's an option I could deal with.
>>
> So the question is, do we now have a 7th
24 matches
Mail list logo
