Dear Wiki user,

You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Ws Wiki" for change 
notification.

The following page has been changed by JochenWiedmann:
http://wiki.apache.org/ws/XML-RPC/2%2e0ReleasePlan

New page:
= RFC: Release Plan XML-RPC 2.0 =

It seems to me to be common sense, that the current tree is almost ready for 
2.0. This RFC should help to give a reply to "What's missing?", "Who does it?" 
and to the details.

== What's missing? ==

I'll list below, what I'd personally see. I suggest that an item should only be 
allowed to enter the list, if there's a volunteer stepping forward:

||'''Task'''||'''Volunteer'''||
||Website Upgrade||spoeschl? (As far as I know, you already did most of the 
work?)||
||Upgrade to commons-httpclient 3.0||jochen||
||Add prerequisite jar files to CVS and distribution (Suggestion)||jochen||
||Support for gzip compression||hgomez||

Remaining questions: What else? Is adding prerequisite jar files ok? I 
personally would support it, because it simplifies the use of XML-RPC and all 
prerequisites are either under ASL (commons-codec, commons-httpclient, 
servlet-api) or CPL (junit).


== Open Bugs ==

I am ignoring bugs, which have been entered before 2004-Jan-1 and bugs with 
priority normal or less. That leaves

||XMLRPC-56||An asynchronous callback object that manages timeouts||
||XMLRPC-57||Unreleased version XMLRPC_1_2_B2||
||XMLRPC-58||Incorrect bugreporting address||
||XMLRPC-59||Missing directories in currently released tarball||

All of which either don't apply to 2.0 (XMLRPC-57) or aren't sufficiently 
serious, IMO.

Questions: Any other bugs we should consider?

== Release plan ==

 * Release 2.0 beta is created after the above task list is completed.
 * Release 2.0 is created four weeks later, if there are no serious bug 
reports. A bug report (Jira!) is considered serious, if any committer declares 
it serious. (How? Set a keyword in Jira?)
 * If there are serios errors, a version 2.0 RC 1 is created two weeks, after 
all serious bug reports are closed. Version 2.0 is created two weeks later, if 
there are no serious bugs. Otherwise, 2.0 RC2, ... is required and the schedule 
is delayed in the same manner.
 * A maintenance branch r2_0 is created with the release of version 2.0. The 
branch is dedicated for bug fixing and releases 2.0.1,..., if any.

Questions: Is the above too simple? Do we need separate votes for rc's
or the final version? Anyone volunteering to do the releases? If no one else 
does, I'll do. (Need to create a JaxMe release anyways, so it seems half the 
work.)

Reply via email to