On Jan 2, 2008 4:06 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Apologies for the long delay in responding to this. > > I am concerned about the number of significant JIRAs that are open > against the current trunk code. I have been working on two of these > that I consider to be "must fix" for 1.1. They are TUSCANY-1849 and > TUSCANY-1939. I have a fix for TUSCANY-1939 that is ready to commit > today, and I will then turn my attention to TUSCANY-1849. After I > have committed a fix for this, I will look at Simon's list and resolve > as many of the others as I can before 1.1 is frozen. > > Simon > > ant elder wrote: > > > 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 > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > OK, I don't see any advantage of freezing it now while people are still working on 1.1 items in trunk.
If there is anyone working on, or planning working on, non 1.1 items in trunk then please speak up now because that will force me to freeze sooner rather than later. I suggest we review where we are again on Friday. Any more comments on JIRA? Simon
