Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > > Seeking for perfection keeps stalling us. > > Hence focusing on what we can do now. > > > Could we not backout that patch and revisit it after alpha1? > > Well, we could just as easily leave it in, too. But I do > want to take a > closer look at it.
Not knowing what the patch is, all I'm saying is that if you are unsure if it will break something, hold it back until you have confidence in it. Whether it gets into aplha1 or alpha21 doesn't matter. We only freeze features when switching from alphas to release candidates don't we? > > > we're talking about a release plan starting > > > now, not post POJO and a million other things. > > > We should be looking at releasing what we have now. > > Well, I would start the process, but if we have some low hanging fruit > pending, I would just as soon try to get it into this cycle. > > > Should we be trying to sweep up as many open issues in Jira > > as we can too? This might mean fixes, won't fix, or fix in > > a post 3.0 release. > > Right. But focus on things we can fix now, not that will take merging > MIME4J or other changes. Get this out, and then start > merging in those new > functional changes. Yep! Dealing with Jira entries means classifying them and just one of those classifications - fix version 3.0 - means incorporating them into the release. We can classify MIME4J or other possible architectural changes to a fix version of 'unknown'. Post 3.0 we can reclassify them to a specific fix version or even 'Won't fix' if we decide that this isn't the way we are going. Its just a way of reducing the number of open issues that some people view as indicative of us being unresponsive. There may be better ways? > > I just want to make this good and stable. Absolutely! A solid base for the future. -- Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
