On 24.04.2025 21:29, Gilbert Barmwater wrote:
I don't believe we have enough time to make this happen, however "nice" it would be. A quick
check of SF bugs shows 141 "open" tickets! Now, assuming some of those could be "skipped", it
still will take a LOT of time to review them and decide what "really" should be fixed before we
release a 5.1.0 GA. FWIW
PS There are STILL "leftover" bugs and RFEs from 5.0.0 that apparently no one wants to spend time
on. (We did make some progress on that list but more remains to be done.) To continue to "carry"
those items into another GA release would be extremely unprofessional IMO.
About 30 years ago I was stunned when learning that Microsoft would release Word with more than
10,000 known bugs (in their bug database)! Of course Word was and has been a professional product.
Microsoft (and other companies that release professional software with known bugs) do so when no
known show-stopper bugs are open, but only minor ones (no matter how many it seems).
Ad bugs and RFEs from 5.0.0: frankly, I do not see them as show-stoppers, also despite being
overworked I tried to tackle those items where I thought my knowledge would be helpful (alleviating
others from getting acquainted).
However, I lacked to see you giving a helping hand here, so I assume that these open items were not
really important to you. Definitely they are not show stoppers.
As this is a project of volunteers everyone is invited and free to lend a helping hand, no matter
how small or big the hand ist. Just pointing out, putting a spin and than wait and see is not enough
for resolving those items. So please, Gil, if you can, lend us your helping hand as your expertise
is big, needless to say and as you would be able to tackle most of those open bugs!
[Of course, it would be great if we would arrive at a release with no open bugs at the time of
release. This would be possible by addressing those bugs after the release and creating micro
releases. I really would urge you to also lend your hand to get them ironed out. FWIW in "my"
BSF4ooRexx850 project there are no open, known bugs. If bugs get reported I try to address them as
quickly as possible, knowing that the expertise needed e.g. in JNI would not be something many Rexx
developers may have such that a fix would take a long time. The situation with ooRexx is very
different, we have quite a few knowledgeable developers who can tackle and resolve the open bugs and
RFEs.]
So looking around the software world, releasing a product with open bugs that are not show-stoppers
*is* professional, like it or not! :)
Therefore, after the release we should try to tackle the open bugs and create micro releases,
exploiting that number in our version number (cf. .RexxInfo~release).
[Also, I would be *very* interested to analyze Executor with regards of its experimental features
added to ooRexx and try to get most of them, if not all, into ooRexx, notably the nifty Unicode
support!]
Please realize also, that the quite comprehensive unit tests pass for 5.1.0 making it of release
quality, i.e. a professional release that improves older ooRexx release versions! As there are no
show-stopper bugs, IMHO there is no reason not to release the current version, making the
International Rexx symposium the event to communicate and report on it! Not releasing it hinders the
ooRexx community to take advantage of the new features coming with ooRexx, e.g. the new TraceObject
class enhancing tracing considerably!
---rony
On 4/24/2025 1:13 PM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
Suggesting to prepare a general availability version for ooRexx 5.1.0 with the aim to release it
next week such that we have a new release for this year's International Rexx symposium in Vienna.
Any thaughts, comments?
---rony
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
