Thanks for all of the clarification Ted. I agree with all of them. I do have one suggestion regarding this statement:
>> if a problem is found with a distribution at any time, we should
>> "not hold our peace". We should immediately downgrade the
>> release and roll another that fixes the problem. ;)
We should define the difference between "problem" and "bug" and possibly clarify others like "new feature".
We all have enough experience to know that it is by practical definition that all software has bugs. All software also has a community that has an interest in adding new features or performing compatibility testing with other platforms (e.g. new VMs and new databases).
So then, what is a "problem"? Certainly we can't simply downgrade the release because it doesn't work on an untested database or contains a bug that affects a new feature.
Perhaps a "problem" by definition should be:
A serious deficiency or error that impacts a formerly available feature and breaks existing production code.
So for example, the following are not problems that would warrant a release rollback:
* A bug or omission in a new feature (i.e. doesn't break existing code)
* A bug that is present because of a new or broken 3rd party driver, database, virtual machine or operating system
* The failure to fix an existing bug reported in JIRA (whether attempted or not)
* A bug that is fixed that DOES break existing code, but is agreed by the community that it is the right way to go
* Production code is broken due to customization of the iBATIS framework beyond the supported extensions
Of course, these are all problems that would be fixed, but a new release will not be downgraded unless it impacts existing production code.
Does anyone agree? Disagree?
Cheers,
Clinton
On 5/17/05, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/16/05, Brandon Goodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1
>
> On 5/16/05, Clinton Begin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> >
> > Vote now or forever hold your peace.
:) I know we're having fun here :) ... but, for the record, if a
problem is found with a distribution at any time, we should "not hold
our peace". We should immediately downgrade the release and roll
another that fixes the problem. ;)
Unfortunately, I don't have a Java application in production against
which to test the distribution, so I will have to abstain from the
quality vote :(
Do we have another PPMC member that has tested the distribution and
can +1 it, so we have the minimum quorum of three? We could then pass
the vote by the Incubator PMC and make this an official ASF release.
And, just to nitpick, before the quality vote, we should try to use
the word "distribution" or "milestone rather than "release". In the
ASF lexicon, the word "release" implies that it's been approved by the
project PMC and the community at large. Here, we've rolled an alpha
distribution, that is on track for being an official release.
-Ted.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Clinton
> >
>
