Hi Tom, What a pleasant surprise :)
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:16 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > From an outsiders point of view, this whole OCW release has made > interesting viewing :) > > No joke ;) > Hopefully you wont mind me adding my 2c, and I don't use the platform so > this is purely hypothetical. > Not at all. I personally welcome outsiders PoV. > > It would seem to me that is shouldn't be too hard to dump in a bunch of > "releases" into Jira that are quarterly or so, they dont have to be set in > stone, just a rough guide to when the next release is due, at least this > way releases aren't a surprise or creeping up on any body, as is the > roadmap. > ACK > > As Lewis mentioned you then assign issues to releases, that list doesnt' > have to be fixed, if something doesn't make it just bump it to the next > release, but at least then people should have a rough idea as to what is > coming in the next release. Outside of the ASF I'm a big fan of the Git > Flow process to get code ready for releasing, you could easily support > something like that in a project like this where a week or so before a > release branch the release code and just accept bug fixes to that branch > whilst not blocking up people who want to commit new stuff to the main > development branch. Use the tools you have available to you! > ACK > > Similarly, what's in a number? Just because you've hit 1.0 doesn't mean it > has to be feature complete, but if its major enough then call it 1. If you > have to fix some stuff for the 1 release then call the next one 1.0.1, if > on the other hand you add some new functionality to the code base then call > it 1.1 and everyone should be happy. Of course if your update changes a > load of API stuff or breaks things then call it 2! Its not hard :) > > Agreed. ACK'd, Seen... and all that good stuff!!! We definitely need to get targeted feature rich releases established for OCW. This is what potential user communities want and we need to acknowledge that. Thanks Tom. Lewis
