On Jan 2, 2008 2:11 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 20, 2007 10:07 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > As an experiment I looked down the first page of the outstanding bug > list > > [1] allocating to release 1.1 those bugs that I believed should be > fixed. > > I was looking for the sort of thing which showed a failure of some > feature > > of Tuscany, didn't obviously have a work round and that wasn't obviously > > some kind of enhancement from what we have already. Difficult to apply > this > > consistently and I'm sure we would all come up with different lists. Non > the > > less I came up with 9 JIRA on the page of 50 (I moved some others as I'm > > trying to address as many of the release build related bugs as I can. > I'm > > not counting them for this purpose). Just be multiplying that up for the > > remaining pages that gives us over 30 must fixes before 1.1. So if you > > are planning to work on the release during the rest of the year please > use > > this as a guide. > > > > In reality I know we won't get these all done but we need to ensure 1.1. > > is of suitable quality. Perhaps a more realistic way of looking at this > is > > if we we had to do 2 each before we start voting on a release candidate > in > > January which two would they be? I'm working my way though the > (hopefully) > > straightforward release related JIRA but I expect the RC process will > raise > > more of these so experience tells us we will have these to deal with > also. > > > > Any thoughts about how we approach this? > > > > Regards > > > > Simon > > > > [1] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=12310210&status=1&status=3&status=4&component=-1&component=12310625&component=12311294&component=12310646&component=12310649&component=12311818&component=12310652&component=12311651&component=12310647&component=12310952&component=12311790&component=12311980&component=12311785&component=12311645&component=12311586&component=12311583&component=12310648&component=12311793&component=12311650&component=12310921&component=12311792&component=12311791&component=12311648&component=12311890&component=12310651&component=12310800&component=12311649&component=12310650&component=12310801&component=12311647&component=12311910&component=12310644&component=12311354&component=12310590&component=12310642&fixfor=-1&fixfor=-2&fixfor=12312358&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=DESC > > > > > > As you may have noticed I've just moved over the rest of the easy JIRA > that > relate to samples for 1.1 and that mostly got deferred last time round. > These are primarily README type fixes and take little effort to either fix > or discount so I'll get on with them. I've still not had any feedback on > how > people feel about the harder technical JIRA that remain outstanding. > > Currently I'm waiting for a few things before I can potentially cut the > branch. In particular, > > JMS > Venkat's last policy changes (he's committed but there may be a few > adjustments to make) > Some help with the Saxon dependency > > This means the formal branch won't happen for a couple of days yet. > However, > > > Should we get some more of the outstanding JIRA fixed for 1.1? > If so which ones (I moved some of the likely candidates to 1.1 before > Christmas but not all), i.e. who is going to do what ? > > Personally there are a couple of domain related JIRAs I want to fix but I > need to know from everyone whether I should go ahead and cut the branch > (once I'm in a position to do so) or whether we are going to spend some > time > fixing JIRA. > > Thanks > > Simon >
Does taking the branch have to wait for JMS? I'm a little behind so it may be a day or two before the binding is in a releasable state but the branch could still happen now and I'll can just copy over any changes. ...ant
