Okay, I've tagged all of the issues for the 1.2.0 release, so we have a
good idea of what needs to be knocked out to get the 1.2.0 release done :-).

-Nick

On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 9:43 AM Nick Couchman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks for fixing those issues up, Mike.
>
> I'm totally good being flexible with the 1.2.0 release and factoring in
> some of the bug fixes and minor tweaks coming off the 1.1.0 release.  My
> biggest goal is to keep the momentum up and release 1.2.0 sometime prior to
> January 2021 :-D.  In all seriousness, though, I'd like to limit the
> feature creep on this release so that we don't end up with any huge
> blockers and can turn it around a little more quickly.
>
> -Nick
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 9:48 PM Mike Jumper <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> This list looks good to me, and the scope is fairly minimal. I think we
>> should plan to be flexible and include bugs that can demonstrated to be
>> regressions from 1.1.0, even if those bugs are not yet currently known and
>> even if scope is otherwise settled, unless we're so far down the release
>> or
>> the bug is so minor that the disruption to the scope outweighs the benefit
>> of a next-release fix.
>>
>> In general, from my perspective, a 1.2.0 release should include (at a
>> minimum):
>>
>> * Issues for which code has already been merged (naturally).
>> * Issues which are known regressions from 1.1.0.
>> * Issues which are not yet known, are discovered after 1.2.0 is already
>> underway, but are determined to be regressions from 1.1.0.
>>
>> I'm mainly concerned that we'll find something down the line where a flag
>> like freerdp->dont_be_broken became freerdp->DoBeBroken in a later
>> release,
>> we didn't notice during the 2.0.0 migration, and things are still being
>> set
>> to TRUE. There may well be little surprises in the internal behavior of
>> FreeRDP that we just won't discover until enough users have pummeled 1.1.0
>> that they happen to pull the right book or lift the right candle and a
>> secret passageway opens.
>>
>> I'm happy to see the issues that Nick listed included, as well. I only
>> found the following problems:
>>
>> * Changes for GUACAMOLE-300 have been merged to master for 1.2.0 but the
>> issue was not tagged for 1.2.0. I've updated the issue.
>> * Changes for GUACAMOLE-846 have been merged to master for 1.2.0 but the
>> issue was not tagged for 1.2.0. I've updated the issue.
>> * GUACAMOLE-915 was implicitly fixed for 1.1.0 by GUACAMOLE-930 when it
>> was
>> identified as a regression. I've updated the issue.
>>
>> So, with 300 and 846 being necessarily included, with 915 being removed,
>> and with a nod toward regression flexibility, I'm good with the list as it
>> stands.
>>
>> - Mike
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 5:03 PM Nick Couchman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks for the input, Sean - I definitely agree on trying to maintain
>> > smaller scopes in general going forward.  I would like to see us be
>> able to
>> > actually use the patch version and do some bug fixes or minor
>> > improvements.  It feels like we've spent the past couple of years
>> catching
>> > up on a backlog that includes some pretty big feature enhancements, and
>> it
>> > has made it difficult to build a momentum for releases.  If we could
>> get a
>> > 1.2.0 release done in a small handful of weeks, perhaps we could start
>> > tightening those scopes down a little more and get a good cadence.
>> >
>> > Anyway, if anyone else has input on scope for 1.2.0, please throw that
>> out
>> > there, and we can assign remaining issues to 1.2.0 and start work
>> towards
>> > closing it out.
>> >
>> > -Nick
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 19:27 Sean Reid <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > I don't want to speak much to the scope of this potential release (I
>> > don't
>> > > see any issues with the scope you've outlined, especially since most
>> of
>> > the
>> > > issues are done or have PRs already), but I do agree with your final
>> > > sentiments: to limit the scope so that we can release it quickly and
>> move
>> > > into the next release phase. I tend to prefer a quicker release
>> cadence
>> > > because it can reduce the changes that changes get unwieldy pretty
>> > > naturally and it can help avoid too many big changes that can have
>> > > unintended consequences to stability. I think it can also help
>> minimize
>> > the
>> > > time that a user has to wait from the time a bug is discovered to when
>> > they
>> > > potentially have a release with a fix.
>> > >
>> > > Sean
>> > >
>> > > On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 4:37 PM Nick Couchman <
>> [email protected]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hey, everyone,
>> > > > I know I'm always the one pushing things, but I'd like to start
>> > focusing
>> > > in
>> > > > on scope for the 1.2.0 release.  We already have 37 items tagged for
>> > it,
>> > > > two of them open, and probably a few more that we could throw into
>> the
>> > > mix
>> > > > before we release 1.2.0.
>> > > >
>> > > > First, I want to make sure that 1.2.0 is the correct version for
>> this.
>> > > It
>> > > > seems appropriate to me - it's more than a minor bug fix release,
>> but
>> > I'm
>> > > > not sure there's anything at this point that would push it into a
>> major
>> > > > release candidate.  But, if anyone has thoughts on that, feel free
>> to
>> > > > share.
>> > > >
>> > > > As far as scope goes, here are the issues currently tagged in that
>> > > version
>> > > > in JIRA (
>> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/GUACAMOLE/versions/12345046
>> > > > ):
>> > > > 296 (RDP audio input disconnect)
>> > > > 764 (RDPDR file read/write truncated to 32 bits)
>> > > > 822 (Balancing group missing client identifier)
>> > > > 870 (Connection history query fails against SQL Server)
>> > > > 302 (Refocus relevant in-progress login fields after auth failure)
>> > > > 381 (Allow clipboard access to be disabled)
>> > > > 414 (VNC server TLS disconnect)
>> > > > 514 (Additional VNC authentication methods)
>> > > > 625 (RDP Spanish LATAM Keyboard support)
>> > > > 684 (Insufficient credentials take precedence over Invalid
>> credentials)
>> > > > 723 (Support display of multiple connections in same tab)
>> > > > 732 (navigator.mediaDevices.getUserMedia() returns promise)
>> > > > 736 (CAS module fails against JDK 11)
>> > > > 740 (Spanish translation hard-coded version number)
>> > > > 749 (Filter affects only first level of connection permissions
>> editor)
>> > > > 769 (Parse RADIUS Challenge message correctly)
>> > > > 774 (RADIUS support for MS-CHAPv1/2)
>> > > > 781 (Czech translation)
>> > > > 783 (REST API responses cached in IE11)
>> > > > 784 (Tolerate port number in X-Forwarded-For header)
>> > > > 805 (OpenID authentication redirect loop)
>> > > > 817 (Enter key may repeat following login in FF)
>> > > > 821 (Japanese translation)
>> > > > 837 (RDP keymap for Hungarian keyboard)
>> > > > 859 (Caps Lock keysym via RDP)
>> > > > 861 (Correct Windows Time in drive redirection)
>> > > > 871 (Cursor visibility flag support in terminal)
>> > > > 884 (Avoid Image where possible without performance penalty)
>> > > > 889 (Mismatching attribute names in LDAP schema)
>> > > > 897 (Docker support for restricting authentication to DB)
>> > > > 901 (RDP Belgian French keyboard layout) - Server-side complete,
>> needs
>> > > > client-side changes
>> > > > 905 (Chrome audio input broken)
>> > > > 678 (UriGuacamoleProperty)
>> > > > 734 (Update logback-classic version)
>> > > > 741 (Spanish translation duplicates APP.NAME string)
>> > > > 742 (Display feedback while waiting for login)
>> > > > 772 (Reduce guacd Docker image size)
>> > > > 852 (MariaDB JDBC Support)
>> > > >
>> > > > In addition to these, I'd propose adding the following issues to the
>> > > scope
>> > > > and then finalizing and working toward that over the coming weeks:
>> > > > 942 (Possible MySQL regression)
>> > > > 917 (Fix tilde mapping in German keyboard)
>> > > > 915 (Move $apply to $applyAsync to fix international selector)
>> > > > 728 (MySQL SSL issue)
>> > > > 883 (iOS 13 touch screen regression)
>> > > > 903 (Chinese internationalization improvements)
>> > > > 474 (Allow file upload and download to be disabled) - PR in progress
>> > > > 793 (CAS Group Support) - PR is out there
>> > > > 818 (Missing files in SFTP) - Change has been suggested on the JIRA
>> > > issue,
>> > > > but no PR.
>> > > > 820 (IP address filtering) - Looks like cause has been identified,
>> just
>> > > > needs a fix)
>> > > > 823 (Empty balancing group regression) - This has been bisected
>> down to
>> > > > cause, just needs fix
>> > > > 759 (French translation fixed) - PR needs review
>> > > > 708 (Auto-create JDBC users) - PR needs work and review
>> > > > 513 (Wake On LAN extension) - PR being worked
>> > > > 103 (SAML Authentication) - PR is out there, needs rebase, review
>> and
>> > > > testing
>> > > > 583 (SQL Server instance config) - Code is done, waiting on testing
>> and
>> > > > need to submit PR
>> > > > 465 (guacenc codec support) - PR is being worked
>> > > >
>> > > > There are several other issues out there getting a lot of attention
>> and
>> > > > work - like Single Log Out for the SSO modules, but I'm
>> intentionally
>> > > > trying to limit scope to stuff that is already pretty well in
>> progress
>> > > and
>> > > > can be reviewed, merged, and worked toward the next release.  If
>> there
>> > > are
>> > > > others that someone thinks we should add on, please feel free to
>> > suggest
>> > > > them, but my suggestion at this point is to avoid letting the scope
>> get
>> > > too
>> > > > big for the next release so that we can get it out there pretty
>> > quickly,
>> > > > and then we can work toward 1.2.1 or 1.3.0 or whatever we decide
>> comes
>> > > > after that.  If anyone thinks we should be more restrictive in scope
>> > and
>> > > > take some of the others I suggested above off the list, that's fine,
>> > too
>> > > -
>> > > > let's discuss!
>> > > >
>> > > > -Nick
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to