Agreed ! On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Justin Ross <jr...@redhat.com> wrote: > In my opinion, since these issues represent regressions, they should block > the release. If it takes another week or two, so be it. > > Meanwhile, trunk is open for 0.12 development and has been for some time. At > this point I don't see a reason to deviate from our schedule[1]. Unless the > fixes for these problems consume a lot of developer time, we should be able > to maintain our 4-month cadence. > > Justin > > --- > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/qpid/0.12+Release > > > On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Rajith Attapattu wrote: > >> Since we are striving hard to get into a habit of doing quarterly >> releases, we will at some point need to make some *hard" decisions in >> order to stick to our timelines. >> Therefore I think it's important we discuss how we make some of those >> decisions. >> >> A good example is QPID-3214 & QPID-3216 which are fairly serious >> regressions but perhaps not blockers in the current scheme of things. >> If we do not have another release coming in 2 months, I would updated >> their status as "blockers" and insist that we fix them. >> But if we do that for this release our dates would slip by another 2 >> weeks or so. >> And that may end up causing us to miss our goal of doing 4 release this >> year. >> I think as a project it's far more important for us to hit that goal >> compared to these two issues missing the 0.10 release. >> >> On the hand these issues can cause problems for our users, therefore >> we should also look at possible ways of fixing them between two major >> releases. >> One way of doing this is to make an errata release between two major >> releases. >> Again the questions would be, >> >> 1. Do we have enough time and resources to do this kind of thing ? >> 2. Will the errata release eat into our next release cycle ? >> 3. What if the next release gets delayed ? is that fair from a users pov ? >> >> I'd like to hear some thoughts about this from the community. >> My personal preference is to do an errata release for QPID-3214 & >> QPID-3216 (and any other serious issues like that). >> What do you guys think ? >> >> Regards, >> >> Rajith >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation >> Project: http://qpid.apache.org >> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation > Project: http://qpid.apache.org > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
