John Casey wrote: > Hi everyone, > > So, it seems that we're all in agreement about the rough outline for > 2.1.x and beyond. I've renamed the current RC branch to be 2.1.0-M1-RC > to make this the first milestone toward some as-yet-undetermined feature > list for 2.1.0. > > So, let's talk about that feature list. From earlier comments, I've > gathered that the following may be good targets to include for 2.1.0: > > - Dan's reactor changes > - Parallel downloads > - PGP stuff > - MNG-624 and related issues/feature enhancements (parent versioning, > right?) > > What I don't know is what state of maturity each of these is in, and on > what timeline they can be stabilized. Do the relevant developers have > enough time to finish implementing, testing, and documenting each > feature, so we could get a 2.1.0 GA out in, say 6 weeks or so? Maybe a > better approach would be to try for a new milestone release that > contains the final result of each new feature (with latent parts of the > rest, as we work on them), such that the 2.1.0 GA will contain all the > new features in their complete forms, with any regressions identified > fixed and incorporated? > > I haven't found the pertinent Confluence pages describing the above > features yet...maybe they don't exist or maybe I haven't looked hard > enough yet, but we'll need to collect the list somewhere that we can > make it public going forward, and then publish that release plan URL on > the Maven site. > > Are there other things that we can fit into this sort of timeframe? Is > this too much? It's my strong preference that we try to cap this release > cycle at two months, so I guess this means taking the list of "nearly > there" features and determining whether we'll have the time to stabilize > them for inclusion, given our current availability.
With a timeframe of 2 months I would like to see Doxia beta-1 included in the core. This is tracked in JIRA as http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3602 In the discussions surrounding that issue it was determined there would not be enough exposure of Doxia beta-1 until the next release (at that time). But with the new timeframe for the 2.1 release we should be able to get good testing of Doxia beta-1. > Of course, once we settle the 2.1.0 release plan, we can start talking > about what we're going to do for 2.2, 2.3, etc. As long as we keep > things rolling, there's no reason anyone needs to feel overly rushed > about getting a particular feature in a particular release...it should > NOT be your only chance. :-) > > What does anyone else think? > > -john > -- Dennis Lundberg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
