26 May
2011
26 May
'11
7:13 a.m.
We have 17 unresolved issues which are labeled as needed to be fixed for 3.1-RC1.
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu…
Some of these issues are relatively new and others are quite old and have had their
fix-for version advanced at each release.
In my opinion setting a fix-for version is equivalent to making a promise to produce a fix
by a certain date.
To make a promise and fail to keep it is bad but making a habit of periodically breaking
promises and making new ones is far worse.
Since I have proposed a freeze on new features I would like to propose removing these fix
for versions.
WDYT?
Caleb
26 May
26 May
8:15 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [proposal] Remove fix-for version from all issues fix-for 3.1-RC1.
+1. I took care of those assigned to me.
Thanks,
Marius
On 05/26/2011 08:13 AM, Caleb James DeLisle wrote:
We have 17 unresolved issues which are labeled as
needed to be fixed for 3.1-RC1.
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu…
Some of these issues are relatively new and others are quite old and have had their
fix-for version advanced at each release.
In my opinion setting a fix-for version is equivalent to making a promise to produce a
fix by a certain date.
To make a promise and fail to keep it is bad but making a habit of periodically breaking
promises and making new ones is far worse.
Since I have proposed a freeze on new features I would like to propose removing these fix
for versions.
WDYT?
Caleb
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
11:19 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [proposal] Remove fix-for version from all issues fix-for 3.1-RC1.
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 07:13, Caleb James DeLisle
<calebdelisle(a)lavabit.com> wrote:
We have 17 unresolved issues which are labeled as
needed to be fixed for 3.1-RC1.
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu…
Some of these issues are relatively new and others are quite old and have had their
fix-for version advanced at each release.
In my opinion setting a fix-for version is equivalent to making a promise to produce a
fix by a certain date.
To make a promise and fail to keep it is bad but making a habit of periodically breaking
promises and making new ones is far worse.
Since I have proposed a freeze on new features I would like to propose removing these fix
for versions.
WDYT?
+1 for new features/improment and not critical bug on which nobody is
working on of course but I can see there is at least one recent
regression in there ( XWIKI-6580 ) that should really be fixed as any
known regression. It should actually be a blocker if it's really a
regression.
Caleb
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
11:20 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [proposal] Remove fix-for version from all issues fix-for 3.1-RC1.
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 11:19, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
--
Thomas Mortagne
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 07:13, Caleb James DeLisle
<calebdelisle(a)lavabit.com> wrote:
(took care of the one I know should be moved by the way)
We have 17 unresolved issues which are labeled as
needed to be fixed for 3.1-RC1.
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu…
Some of these issues are relatively new and others are quite old and have had their
fix-for version advanced at each release.
In my opinion setting a fix-for version is equivalent to making a promise to produce a
fix by a certain date.
To make a promise and fail to keep it is bad but making a habit of periodically breaking
promises and making new ones is far worse.
Since I have proposed a freeze on new features I would like to propose removing these fix
for versions.
WDYT?
+1 for new features/improment and not critical bug on which nobody is
working on of course but I can see there is at least one recent
regression in there ( XWIKI-6580 ) that should really be fixed as any
known regression. It should actually be a blocker if it's really a
regression.
Caleb
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
11:23 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [proposal] Remove fix-for version from all issues fix-for 3.1-RC1.
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 11:20, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
--
Thomas Mortagne
--
Thomas Mortagne
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 11:19, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
I can see a lot of commits associated to XWIKI-5773 so if it's not
done already it would be good to at least log in the issue what's done
and left to do.
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 07:13, Caleb James
DeLisle
<calebdelisle(a)lavabit.com> wrote:
(took care of the one I know should be moved by the way) We have 17 unresolved issues which are labeled as
needed to be fixed for 3.1-RC1.
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu…
Some of these issues are relatively new and others are quite old and have had their
fix-for version advanced at each release.
In my opinion setting a fix-for version is equivalent to making a promise to produce a
fix by a certain date.
To make a promise and fail to keep it is bad but making a habit of periodically breaking
promises and making new ones is far worse.
Since I have proposed a freeze on new features I would like to propose removing these fix
for versions.
WDYT?
+1 for new features/improment and not critical bug on which nobody is
working on of course but I can see there is at least one recent
regression in there ( XWIKI-6580 ) that should really be fixed as any
known regression. It should actually be a blocker if it's really a
regression.
Caleb
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
12:05 p.m.
On May 26, 2011, at 7:13 AM, Caleb James DeLisle wrote:
We have 17 unresolved issues which are labeled as
needed to be fixed for 3.1-RC1.
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu…
You could actually create a new jira filter by copying the one I had created for the 3.0
release and which combines all jira projects in the correct version for the 3.1 release.
Some of these issues are relatively new and others are
quite old and have had their fix-for version advanced at each release.
In my opinion setting a fix-for version is equivalent to making a promise to produce a
fix by a certain date.
I agree
To make a promise and fail to keep it is bad but
making a habit of periodically breaking promises and making new ones is far worse.
Since I have proposed a freeze on new features I would like to propose removing these fix
for versions.
WDYT?
+1 to remove non bug issues which have no people assigned
+1 to ping each person who has open issues assigned to himself/herself
+1 to explicitly list each individual remaining issue (ie non-assigned bugs) and ask
developers if they want to take them. Wait 2 days and remove if no answer.
Thanks
-Vincent
3:09 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [proposal] Remove fix-for version from all issues fix-for 3.1-RC1.
On 05/26/2011 06:05 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On May 26, 2011, at 7:13 AM, Caleb James DeLisle wrote:
After checking I see we are down to 4 and only one unassigned bug, great job guys, thanks
a lot.
The unassigned bug is:
XWIKI-6086 - Go to page doesn't work when typing "Admin" with a user not
having programming rights
so if anyone wants to volunteer to tackle that then go ahead and assign yourself.
I also notice we have a blocker so we will need to have it closed or re-evaluated before
we can release.
sdumitriu? tmortagne? ETA on this?
Caleb
We have 17 unresolved issues which are labeled as
needed to be fixed for 3.1-RC1.
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu…
You could actually create a new jira filter by copying the one I had created for the 3.0
release and which combines all jira projects in the correct version for the 3.1 release.
Some of these issues are relatively new and
others are quite old and have had their fix-for version advanced at each release.
In my opinion setting a fix-for version is equivalent to making a promise to produce a
fix by a certain date.
I agree
To make a promise and fail to keep it is bad but
making a habit of periodically breaking promises and making new ones is far worse.
Since I have proposed a freeze on new features I would like to propose removing these fix
for versions.
WDYT?
+1 to remove non bug issues which have no people assigned
+1 to ping each person who has open issues assigned to himself/herself
+1 to explicitly list each individual remaining issue (ie non-assigned bugs) and ask
developers if they want to take them. Wait 2 days and remove if no answer.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
4915
days inactive
4915
days old
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Caleb James DeLisle -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol