Re: [DISCUSS] Planning process for 3.5.1

[Robert Scholte]

I think we need to agree what should be part of this release.

3.5.1 should be a bugfix release, i.e. no completely new features, though  
some minor improvements seem okay.
All regressions between 3.3.9 and 3.5.0 should be part of 3.5.1, because  
new issues are in general easier to reproduce. If it ends up down on the  
backlog the analysis will take often too much time. If we could keep up  
the pace regarding regression bugs we make it ourself a lot easier.


Looking at JIRA's issues for 3.5.1 and 3.5.1-candidate[1] we need to  
decide if these are still valid or if we can identify a group/theme which  
should be moved to a next major release.


The process with seconding worked good enough, but what helped here is a  
clear scope.


Robert

[1]  
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MNG%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(3.5.1-candidate%2C3.5.1)%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC



On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 12:43:42 +0100, Stephen Connolly  
 wrote:



So planning for 3.5.0 was total chaos... but it seems to have worked.

How do we want to work for 3.5.1?

(As usual, I have my own ideas but I will hold back until I see some
suggestions from others because we are a community and as release manager
for 3.5.1 my opinion might be too powerful and we could miss out on a
really great idea just because I've said my "slightly crappy idea" ;-) )


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Planning process for 3.5.1

[Tibor Digana]

>>Question is: How to decide which commits/JIRA
issues will be merged to master for the next release?

Usually I respect the Jira priority, e.g. blocker or critical or I change
the priority, and then those issues are preferable which necessarily must
change the architecture first due to other Jira issues depend on it.
Also change order of issues to what is more important for you from the
point of future. You know what is the target you want to reach and thus you
must have your own priorities. Step by step, you change something because
you know what is best fitting to your development and what is the most
simple for you.

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Christian Schulte  wrote:

> Am 03/19/17 um 12:43 schrieb Stephen Connolly:
> > So planning for 3.5.0 was total chaos... but it seems to have worked.
> >
> > How do we want to work for 3.5.1?
>
> We need to answer all the other questions first (versioning, bug vs.
> feature, branches, etc.). Question is: How to decide which commits/JIRA
> issues will be merged to master for the next release?
>
> Regards,
> --
> Christian
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Cheers
Tibor

Re: [DISCUSS] Planning process for 3.5.1

[Christian Schulte]

Am 03/19/17 um 12:43 schrieb Stephen Connolly:
> So planning for 3.5.0 was total chaos... but it seems to have worked.
> 
> How do we want to work for 3.5.1?

We need to answer all the other questions first (versioning, bug vs.
feature, branches, etc.). Question is: How to decide which commits/JIRA
issues will be merged to master for the next release?

Regards,
-- 
Christian


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

[DISCUSS] Planning process for 3.5.1

[Stephen Connolly]

So planning for 3.5.0 was total chaos... but it seems to have worked.

How do we want to work for 3.5.1?

(As usual, I have my own ideas but I will hold back until I see some
suggestions from others because we are a community and as release manager
for 3.5.1 my opinion might be too powerful and we could miss out on a
really great idea just because I've said my "slightly crappy idea" ;-) )
-- 
Sent from my phone