Stefano Bagnara wrote:
Not totally true, as I think that some people (like myself)
has been thoroughly testing even in production the contents
of svn. Specially after Noel's work in May, which has been a
major (and potentially risky) update impacting the whole
system ... And James looked quite stable after that.
We also, in the last month:
- updated all of our libraries
(cornerstone/avalon/excalibur/dnsjava/javamail)
- updated phoenix (so as you can see we already "changed" the container)
For me, a container change *has a big impact* (specially because it is a partially "dead" container outside of our
control), and I was very "nervous" during Noel's work on May until my tests (better, my production system carefully
watched for weeks) showed that everything was running fine.
I'm again a little bit nervous now after the August container changes, and I would become a little bit more nervous if
another change in this area should come *before creating a new release*. If what we have now is not enough to call it
2.3.0, let's call it 2.2.x. Although I feel that all this container change makes is worth to be called 2.3.0.
- added derby support and we're planning to make it the default instead of
file repositories.
- changed today the mail repositories notify/synchronization
I think all of this have to be tested a lot and can impact the stability
more than the container.
BTW, this is my opinion.
The last one (notiy/synchronization) in my opinion is the most critical.
Agreed. I remember Noel fixing more than two years ago a bug in this area that ran me crazy for several months, very
hard to track.
The main thing is that we are not near to a release because we don't even
have a release plan by now and we just talked about doing a release.
In the best scenario we probably will be ready to prepare the first ALPHA in
a month: probably more as we haven't agreed on the roadmap for this release.
This way IMHO we will never get to a release, because we will be introducing
more bugs to fix than fixing old ones.
IMHO we should make no more architectural changes, start testing immediately and release *as soon as possible* a safe
release. The more we wait, less people around will do any *real* testing.
This is what I think is the release plan we should agree upon. And we have been talking about doing a release since
several months.
And this is why I recently said that we should stop and take a breath... :-) By stopping I mean slowing down introducing
architectural changes, that can introduce bugs very hard to track down. Any "minor" enhancement or feature can be
obviously added.
After that, let's go for 2.3.1, 2.4 or 3.0.
BTW, compared to the past, we haven't formally release alpha releases, but
milestones did exist although not set in svn.
Vincenzo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
