On Wednesday 15 April 2015 10:19:05 ??? wrote: > Hi Thiago, Hi June
> > On Tuesday 14 April 2015 19:03:34 ??? wrote: > > > Hi Bernie, > > > > > > > > > > > > Junmo?s schedule is not new one. The schedule below & in the attached > > > mail was shared on 3/24 and discussion has been on-going. > > > > Hi June > > > > That schedule rested on CA being merged at no later than March 30, but > > like > > you said that was delayed by almost 2 weeks. Are you saying that Junmo's > > email is the update to the schedule? > > [June] He is getting the schedule information in order to update/finalize > the release schedule. Ok. > > I don't see how. If we're two weeks late, shouldn't the release date have > > been pushed by two weeks compared to the original plan? > > ? [June] I?m not demanding or pushing about how to shorten the schedule, > but I?m asking for what is the next schedule then, so that we can make the > plan for 0.9.1 release. > > ? 2 weeks delay about 0.9.1 based on what? Who can judge 2 weeks delay > without getting the exact schedule for each feature. > > ? Is it possible for you to confirm 0.9.1 release on 5/11 (by 2 weeks > delay)? I didn't say it was 2 weeks late, the number came from Junmo's email. I might have misunderstood what he meant -- which was the point of my email: clarifying. Anyway, since the CA merge did not happen at the time we expected it to and the release to QA did not happen when we expected, I can only conclude we're delayed. But by how much? Who's tracking that? Moreover, all features are not in. We are NOT in release-candidate state. We are still in alpha stage. > > > And actually April release as Spec vA compliant release was reported > > > to BoD at the OIC OSWG F2F meeting. > > > > don't see how that is relevant. Work takes as long as work it takes. > > ? [June] April release plan was made in front of all of you at OSWG F2F > meeting and then reported to BoD at that time. The point is that an OSWG discussion, including anything reported to the OIC BoD, is not an IoTivity decision. The only thing that was discussed in IoTivity context was the thread you started that included the CA merge and the release to QA. Since there wasn't discussion, we consider that to be the IoTivity plan. We're delayed compared to that. > ? You?re right, work takes as long as work it takes, but how much time do > we need more for the release then? That's what we need to find out. Let's start with the most important date: when is feature freeze? Feature freeze is the last date when any feature can be merged into master that makes the 0.9.1 release. Any feature that misses that date will not be in 0.9.1. On that date, we branch off and start the release QA. We can also release a beta on the same day. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
