Those release notes don't include all the work being tracked on GitHub issues and PRs.
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 1:20 AM Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 10:46 PM Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote: > > > I'm just trying to point out the fallacy of meeting deadlines when the > > criteria for "success" is undefined. > > > > > Why? I proposed the timeline to solicit opinions on it. Use whatever > subjective criteria you want to inform your own. If you have criteria that > you think won't be satisfied within that timeline, then raise them for > discussion. > > If Jira is overburdened, move everything out and have people move things > > back. We have multiple tools -- we should at least have one in use. > > Otherwise, this just seems like there are decisions happening behind the > > scenes. > > > > > You lost me. Every release, we triage (finish, reject, or bump) open > issues; nobody's done that yet for 2.0. That's all I was talking about with > regard to the issue tracker noise. > > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 7:52 PM Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > I do not expect that page to be a complete or final set of features > right > > > now, but it's probably better than the issue tracker is (because of all > > the > > > noise of old issues). Part of the goal of this thread was to motivate > > > people to start finalizing that set over the next few weeks as they > > triage > > > open issues and think about what they can realistically finish in the > > > timeline we establish. The hope is that the page will become more and > > more > > > complete as head more strongly towards this release. > > > > > > As for the timeline, I have no problem moving the time table up if we > > get a > > > bit further along and realize we're in a good place to release. I just > > > don't like the pressure of unrealistically short timelines, and I know > > that > > > personally, my summer is going to be very busy regardless. Initially, I > > was > > > hoping we could release around September 1st... but then I figured add > a > > > month for dedicated testing and documentation might be nice... and we'd > > > still release before the summit. > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 6:36 PM Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > Based on that, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4733 > is > > > > the only thing outstanding (and just one question at that). > > > > > > > > Mid/late August seems like a long time until feature-complete for > > > > essentially a no-op of work :) > > > > > > > > On 6/11/18 5:07 PM, Christopher wrote: > > > > > I believe those are being maintained in the draft release notes at > > > > > https://accumulo.apache.org/release/accumulo-2.0.0/ > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 5:02 PM Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> What are the current 2.0.0 features? (Outstanding and completed) > > > > >> > > > > >> On 6/11/18 4:35 PM, Christopher wrote: > > > > >>> Hi Accumulo Devs, > > > > >>> > > > > >>> I've been thinking about the 2.0.0 release timeline. I was > thinking > > > > >>> something like this milestone timeline: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Feature Complete : mid-late August > > > > >>> Dedicated Testing, Documentation, and release voting : all of > > > September > > > > >>> Final release : October 1st > > > > >>> > > > > >>> This schedule would make 2.0.0 available for the Accumulo Summit > > > coming > > > > >> up > > > > >>> in October, with a few weeks to spare. > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
