+1 on releasing 1.3 already and +1 on time based releases.
On Nov 14, 2012 4:18 AM, "Randall Leeds" <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 > > We can do a round up of the status of 1.3 blockers during this week's > meeting and get the focus around it, make sure there's actions for everyone > who needs them for everything to get done. > > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Paul Davis <[email protected] >wrote: > > > The point of not including cors in 1.3 is precisely so we're not rushing > > things. Historically we have had a habit of wanting "the next big feature" > > in "the next big release" which tends to make our releases drag out a bit > > as we wait on volunteers to work through the big features. The idea behind > > time based releases is that we'll have releases regularly and then won't > > need to rush to get big features done quickly because the delay between > > releases will only be a couple months instead of in the 6-12 month range. > > > > +1 on releasing (assuming that all blocker bugs are cleared, I haven't > > checked the list lately) without CORS and docs. > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:07 PM, john.tiger <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > this feels rushed - not a good thing with an enterprise thing like a db - > > > does couch have big users that need the as is 1.3 features asap or even > > > sponsors that are wanting to ship every 3 mos regardless ? If not, why > > not > > > wait and rally troops to make sure cors features are set, documentation > > is > > > done, and some compiling issues are resolved - maybe the committee has > > > other reasons, but 3 mos seems really quick for an enterprise thing like > > a > > > db. > > > > > > Others mlge may vary but we want to use the cors feature - could care > > less > > > about a 1.3 without it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/13/2012 01:08 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > > > > > >> On Nov 13, 2012, at 20:53 , Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> if it's part of 1.3. > > >>>>> > > >>>> The point of this email is to decouple cors & docs from 1.3.0. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> I forgot a "not" obviously.. Sorry for that > > >>> > > >> Clarified via IRC: > > >> > > >> [21:00:26] <benoitc> well was just me trying to ask "do we really want > > to > > >> ship at least without docs? " > > >> [21:00:39] <benoitc> but i'm fine with both > > >> [21:00:40] <+jan____> ah, I’d say yes. > > >> [21:01:12] <benoitc> i wonder if we couldn't put the doc online for 1.3 > > >> at least > > >> [21:01:39] <benoitc> since that part can be easily done > > >> http://rcouch.org/docs/ > > >> [21:01:58] <+jan____> sure, why not, that’s completely unrelated to the > > >> release > > >> [21:02:18] <benoitc> indeed > > >> > > >> Cheers > > >> Jan > > >> > > > > > > > >
