Dears,
I'm not sure if this is the right thread to ask this question.
So far till today we had been working with Fineract version x.y.z;
whereby, we have only touched x,y
i.e. 0.1.0, 0.2.0... and now 0.7.0
While I understand why we haven't touched x, I don't know when we shall
touch z. Or rather what is the criteria to touch version .z above?
Though, I thought that our Fineract application would touch more of
"z". Due to the level of development it is in.
For example...
- I thought critical bugs which affects core banking functionalities
should be resolved with emergency priority through patching; and as for
versioning, we should use the "z" above... and that only new
functionalities should touch the "y" and "x".
- Also, how many votes are required to push emergence fixes. as for ITIL
this usually they don't need fully CAB approval. O rather do we have
operational change approval board... that will approve when what is
needed is only "z"?
My apologies if my post is taking you back....
Regards
Sendoro
On 2017-02-15 00:32, Ed Cable wrote:
Just doing a check-in as to where we stand.
Nazeer has been addressing some of the outstanding points and has
recently
posted some additional release management documentation which can be
viewed
at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=67640333
I have pushed the changes to the Apache Fineract website github repo
and
these have been merged the but the website is not reflecting the edits
I
made.
Nazeer has requested feedback on the Findbugs Implementation he has
ready
go go.
2 active threads are being discussed related to security and backwards
compatibility.
We are also evaluating a couple additional committers and will soon be
ready to call for graduation if our mentors too fee we are ready.
Ed
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com>
wrote:
Makes sense.
> On Jan 25, 2017, at 10:52 PM, Shaik Nazeer <nazeer.shaik@
confluxtechnologies.com> wrote:
>
> Instead of modifying Fineract website on every Fineract releases, can we
link required details to Fineract wiki pages?
> For example latest release details can be found at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FINERACT/Release+Folders
>
> Thanks,
> Nazeer
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Markus Geiß [mailto:mge...@mifos.org]
> Sent: 26 January 2017 01:55
> To: Ed Cable
> Cc: dev (dev@fineract.incubator.apache.org)
> Subject: Re: Please help evaluation Fineract's readiness for graduation
>
> Hey Ed,
>
> the Apache Fineract website is a github repo you'll find at Apache's
github mirror.
>
> Simply fork it, create a new branch, do the needed changes and send a PR.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Markus Geiss
> Chief Architect
> RɅĐɅЯ, The Mifos Initiative
>
> On Jan 24, 2017 15:58, "Ed Cable" <edca...@mifos.org> wrote:
>
>> Markus,
>>
>> Nazeer is continuing to work on addressing the areas of concern
>> related to QU10, QU40, and RE50.
>>
>> Could you provide me access to the Apache Fineract website to address
>> CO10 and then for CS10 do we want that on the Apache Fineract website
>> or the wiki?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:48 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>>> On Jan 6, 2017, at 8:41 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Ed Cable <edca...@mifos.org> wrote:
>>>>> Could our Apache Fineract mentors please provide some guidance on
>>>>> a
>>> couple
>>>>> of the areas we need to improve upon:
>>>>>
>>>>> QU10 "*The project is open and honest about the quality of its code.
>>>>> Various levels of quality and maturity for various modules are
>>>>> natural
>>> and
>>>>> acceptable as long as they are clearly communicated." -*
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have any other projects you could point to that have strong
>>>>> transparent measures of quality and maturity clearly available We
>>>>> want
>>> to
>>>>> follow best practices and adopt similar to display at
>>>>> http://fineract.incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> Regular deployment of tools like Findbugs is a good indication that
>>>> you
>>> take
>>>> this requirement seriously.
>>>>
>>>>> *QU30: The project provides a well-documented channel to report
>>> security
>>>>> issues, along with a documented way of responding to them.*
>>>>>
>>>>> Currently we just link to: http://www.apache.org/security/ Are we
>>> able to
>>>>> do as other projects at
>>>>> http://www.apache.org/security/projects.html
>>> or is
>>>>> a private channel not something we can set up till we're out of
>>>>> incubation. If we can move forwarde, I'd suggest we have a
>>>>> security
>>> page
>>>>> on our site, document and fix known vulnerabilities and then
>>>>> provide
>>> clear
>>>>> instruction on reporting vulnerabilities to a private channel like
>>>>> secur...@fineract.incubator..apache.org
>>>>
>>>> This is less about security@fineract vs.
>>> http://www.apache.org/security/
>>>> and more about the community being ready for when the first 0 day
>>>> hits either of those. Being ready is a combination of tribal
>>>> knowledge, wiki recommendations and a release policy that would
>>>> allow you to patch at a drop of a hat.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Roman.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Ed Cable*
>> Director of Community Programs, Mifos Initiative edca...@mifos.org |
>> Skype: edcable | Mobile: +1.484.477.8649 <(484)%20477-8649>
>>
>> *Collectively Creating a World of 3 Billion Maries | *http://mifos.org
>> <http://facebook.com/mifos> <http://www.twitter.com/mifos>
>>
>>
>
