+1 to back-porting browser client fixes to 2.10 where feasible. -b
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Galen Charlton <g...@esilibrary.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to suggest a change of policy for backporting certain > specific browser client bugs to the rel_2_10 branch after release of > 2.10.0: specifically, that the rel_2_10 branch will accept web staff > client bugfixes — particularly in the areas of circulation and patron > management — as well as relevant core AngularJS services. > > This would mean that: > > * committers would be free (but not obligated) to backport such > bugfixes (note that all testing and QA guidelines would be in effect > for such bugfixes) > * Evergreen developers in general would be encouraged to write such fixes > * users would be encouraged to report such bugs > > This would not be tantamount to full community support for using > webstaff for circulation in production — I don't think we're at the > point where we can do so, unfortunately — but would mean that folks > who are using it in a beta test capacity would have at least some hope > that bugs opened in LP would be looked at. > > One thing I should mention is that at some point relatively soon > backporting webstaff fixes may become more time-consuming [1]; my > suggestion should not be taken to me that anybody should feel any > obligation to rewrite bugfixes to work under AngularJS 1.2. > > Thoughts? > > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1554714 > > Regards, > > Galen > -- > Galen Charlton > Infrastructure and Added Services Manager > Equinox Software, Inc. / Open Your Library > email: g...@esilibrary.com > direct: +1 770-709-5581 > cell: +1 404-984-4366 > skype: gmcharlt > web: http://www.esilibrary.com/ > Supporting Koha and Evergreen: http://koha-community.org & > http://evergreen-ils.org >