[xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle
Hi devs, Now that we've agreed to have major release cycles we need to define what we do for the current cycle (see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HReleaseC...). I'm proposing here to make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle. Here's my +1 Thanks -Vincent
Hi, Le 15 nov. 2010 à 09:35, Vincent Massol a écrit :
Hi devs,
Now that we've agreed to have major release cycles we need to define what we do for the current cycle (see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HReleaseC...).
I'm proposing here to make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle.
Here's my +1 0+
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On 11/15/2010 09:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Now that we've agreed to have major release cycles we need to define what we do for the current cycle (see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HReleaseC...).
I'm proposing here to make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle.
Here's my +1
0. I can't decide before I know what the quality is going to be. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
On Nov 15, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 09:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Now that we've agreed to have major release cycles we need to define what we do for the current cycle (see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HReleaseC...).
I'm proposing here to make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle.
Here's my +1
0. I can't decide before I know what the quality is going to be.
Does it mean you don't agree with the voted Release Cycle strategy since it's time-based an not "quality"-based? Also if by "quality" you mean bugs then 2.7 will not be the last bug fix release of the 2.x cycle; it would be the last minor release only. Thanks -Vincent
On 11/15/2010 11:06 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Nov 15, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 09:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Now that we've agreed to have major release cycles we need to define what we do for the current cycle (see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HReleaseC...).
I'm proposing here to make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle.
Here's my +1
0. I can't decide before I know what the quality is going to be.
Does it mean you don't agree with the voted Release Cycle strategy since it's time-based an not "quality"-based?
No, it means that the strategy does allow for one or more extra releases if the cycle is not stable enough. Let's say that I'm +1 for *trying* to make 2.7 the last release, but until we release it, we can't know if we'll find ten major bugs that we can't fix in the allocated one month period. One such example is the fact that the new recent activity implementation doesn't work in virtual wikis. Do you prefer to release a broken 2.7 and leave it like that?
Also if by "quality" you mean bugs then 2.7 will not be the last bug fix release of the 2.x cycle; it would be the last minor release only.
Thanks -Vincent
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
On Nov 15, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 11:06 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Nov 15, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 09:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Now that we've agreed to have major release cycles we need to define what we do for the current cycle (see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HReleaseC...).
I'm proposing here to make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle.
Here's my +1
0. I can't decide before I know what the quality is going to be.
Does it mean you don't agree with the voted Release Cycle strategy since it's time-based an not "quality"-based?
No, it means that the strategy does allow for one or more extra releases if the cycle is not stable enough. Let's say that I'm +1 for *trying* to make 2.7 the last release, but until we release it, we can't know if we'll find ten major bugs that we can't fix in the allocated one month period. One such example is the fact that the new recent activity implementation doesn't work in virtual wikis. Do you prefer to release a broken 2.7 and leave it like that?
Sergiu please read what I said below. Let me repeat it: * I'm talking about the last **Minor** release not the last **bugfix** release Thanks -Vincent
Also if by "quality" you mean bugs then 2.7 will not be the last bug fix release of the 2.x cycle; it would be the last minor release only.
Thanks -Vincent
On 11/15/2010 11:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Nov 15, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 11:06 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Nov 15, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 09:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Now that we've agreed to have major release cycles we need to define what we do for the current cycle (see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HReleaseC...).
I'm proposing here to make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle.
Here's my +1
0. I can't decide before I know what the quality is going to be.
Does it mean you don't agree with the voted Release Cycle strategy since it's time-based an not "quality"-based?
No, it means that the strategy does allow for one or more extra releases if the cycle is not stable enough. Let's say that I'm +1 for *trying* to make 2.7 the last release, but until we release it, we can't know if we'll find ten major bugs that we can't fix in the allocated one month period. One such example is the fact that the new recent activity implementation doesn't work in virtual wikis. Do you prefer to release a broken 2.7 and leave it like that?
Sergiu please read what I said below. Let me repeat it: * I'm talking about the last **Minor** release not the last **bugfix** release
Yes, agreed, but I'm not talking about ten small, but critical bugs that we find after releasing 2.7 and which could go in 2.7.1, but since we're timeboxing, suppose we still have lots of big bugs left on the planned release day, which would take another month to fix.
Also if by "quality" you mean bugs then 2.7 will not be the last bug fix release of the 2.x cycle; it would be the last minor release only.
Thanks -Vincent
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
On Nov 15, 2010, at 11:43 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 11:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Nov 15, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 11:06 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Nov 15, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 09:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Now that we've agreed to have major release cycles we need to define what we do for the current cycle (see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HReleaseC...).
I'm proposing here to make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle.
Here's my +1
0. I can't decide before I know what the quality is going to be.
Does it mean you don't agree with the voted Release Cycle strategy since it's time-based an not "quality"-based?
No, it means that the strategy does allow for one or more extra releases if the cycle is not stable enough. Let's say that I'm +1 for *trying* to make 2.7 the last release, but until we release it, we can't know if we'll find ten major bugs that we can't fix in the allocated one month period. One such example is the fact that the new recent activity implementation doesn't work in virtual wikis. Do you prefer to release a broken 2.7 and leave it like that?
Sergiu please read what I said below. Let me repeat it: * I'm talking about the last **Minor** release not the last **bugfix** release
Yes, agreed, but I'm not talking about ten small, but critical bugs that we find after releasing 2.7 and which could go in 2.7.1, but since we're timeboxing, suppose we still have lots of big bugs left on the planned release day, which would take another month to fix.
If we have lots of bugs then we shouldn't release 2.7 of course... That's why we have RCs. If we find lots of bugs after the release is done then we'll release 2.7.1, 2.7.2, 2.7.3... But we'll only include critical bug fixes in the bugfix releases and we'll not need to release a new minor version. -Vincent
Also if by "quality" you mean bugs then 2.7 will not be the last bug fix release of the 2.x cycle; it would be the last minor release only.
Thanks -Vincent
On Nov 15, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 11:06 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Nov 15, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 11/15/2010 09:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Now that we've agreed to have major release cycles we need to define what we do for the current cycle (see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HReleaseC...).
I'm proposing here to make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle.
Here's my +1
0. I can't decide before I know what the quality is going to be.
Does it mean you don't agree with the voted Release Cycle strategy since it's time-based an not "quality"-based?
No, it means that the strategy does allow for one or more extra releases if the cycle is not stable enough.
BTW this is not true. It's not what was voted. Also please remember that in what we voted, stability about bugs is achieved through RCs not through the number of minor releases. Thanks -Vincent
Let's say that I'm +1 for *trying* to make 2.7 the last release, but until we release it, we can't know if we'll find ten major bugs that we can't fix in the allocated one month period. One such example is the fact that the new recent activity implementation doesn't work in virtual wikis. Do you prefer to release a broken 2.7 and leave it like that?
Also if by "quality" you mean bugs then 2.7 will not be the last bug fix release of the 2.x cycle; it would be the last minor release only.
Thanks -Vincent
+1 Thanks, Marius On 11/15/2010 10:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Now that we've agreed to have major release cycles we need to define what we do for the current cycle (see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HReleaseC...).
I'm proposing here to make XE 2.7 the last minor release of the 2.x cycle.
Here's my +1
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
participants (4)
-
Gregory GUENEAU -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Vincent Massol