P.S. Let's give dedicated souls the weekend to get stuff in for 4.1 if they
want and cut the first RC early next week....


On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Erick Erickson <[email protected]>wrote:

> I'll take are of SOLR-4112 this morning, probably create another JIRA to
> track unit tests. There aren't any today and I have evidence from the field
> that it makes DIH usable so....
>
> Erick
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Jack Krupansky 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> The window of Monday through Wednesday sounds like a great target.
>> Nothing says that the first RC has to be final. If whoever is doing the
>> branch wants to do it on Monday rather than Tuesday, fine. If one or more
>> of these nasty "blockers" gets fixed on Tuesday, we should still be open to
>> a re-spin to put quality over a mere day or two of delay. But draw a hard
>> line on Wednesday.
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Mark Miller
>> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 3:36 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: 4.1 release
>>
>>
>> Saying tomorrow without any date that gives anyone any time to do
>> anything is out of nowhere to me. People in Europe and east of that will
>> wake up and find out, oh today. While pressure has been building towards a
>> release, no one has proposed a date for a cutoff. I think that is always
>> only fair. I think that if you were desperate to cut off to blockers
>> tomorrow, you should have called for that last week.
>>
>> Robert Muir's short term releases are not threatened by allowing people
>> to plan and execute a release together. You can take that too far and do
>> damage from the opposite direction. Giving people time to tie things up
>> with a real deadline is only fair. We all know a nebulous deadline is not
>> conducive to finishing up work.
>>
>> I think all releases should have a known date that we agree on that gives
>> developers some time to finish what they are working on or what they
>> believe is important for the release. At a minimum there should be a few
>> days for this. A weekend involved only seems fair. This doesn't have to be
>> a long time, but it should not require we file blockers and just seems like
>> a friendly way to develop together.
>>
>> Monday is fine by me if others buy into it.
>>
>> Otherwise, we have taken 4 or 5 months for 4.1. Let's not drag it out
>> another month. But let's not do the reverse and release it tonight. The
>> sensible approach always seems like we should plan out some target dates on
>> the list - dates that actually give devs a chance to respond to - and then
>> follow through on those dates.
>>
>> - Mark
>>
>> On Jan 10, 2013, at 3:26 PM, Steve Rowe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>  Okay - I can see your logic, Mark, but this is not even close to out of
>>> nowhere.  You yourself have been vocal about making a 4.1 release for a
>>> couple weeks now.
>>>
>>> I agree with Robert Muir that we should be promoting short turnaround
>>> releases.  If it doesn't make this release, it'll make the next one, which
>>> will come out in a relatively short span of time.  In this model, Blocker
>>> issues are the drivers, not "Fix Version".    If people want stuff in the
>>> release, they should mark their issue as Blocker.
>>>
>>> How about a compromise - next Monday we branch and only allow Blockers
>>> to block the release?
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>> On Jan 10, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Mark Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>  -1 from me - I don't like not giving people a target date to clean
>>>> things up by. No one has given a proposed date to try and tie things up by
>>>> - just calling 'hike is tomorrow' out of nowhere doesn't seem right to me.
>>>>
>>>> We have a lot of people working on this over a lot of timezones. I
>>>> think we should do the right thing and give everyone at least a few days
>>>> and a weekend to finish getting their issues into 4.1.
>>>>
>>>> - Mark
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 10, 2013, at 2:36 PM, Steve Rowe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  I'd like to start sooner than next Tuesday.
>>>>>
>>>>> I propose to make the branch tomorrow, and only allow Blocker issues
>>>>> to hold up the release after that.
>>>>>
>>>>> A release candidate should then be possible by the middle of next week.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 10, 2013, at 2:27 PM, Mark Miller <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 10, 2013, at 2:12 PM, Steve Rowe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I'd like to release soon.  What else blocks this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think we should toss out a short term date (next tuesday?) for
>>>>>> anyone to get in what they need for 4.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then just consider blockers after branching?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then release?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Objections, better ideas?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think we should give a bit of time for people to finish up what's
>>>>>> in flight or fix any blockers. Then we should heighten testing and allow
>>>>>> for any new blockers, and then kick it out. If we need to do a 4.2 
>>>>>> shortly
>>>>>> after, so be it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Mark
>>>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>>>>>> [email protected].**org<[email protected]>
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>>>> ---------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>>>>> [email protected].**org<[email protected]>
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>>> ---------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>>>> [email protected].**org<[email protected]>
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>> ---------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>>> [email protected].**org<[email protected]>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>> [email protected].**org<[email protected]>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>> [email protected].**org<[email protected]>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to