Everything up there is fair game. http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/helping.html
10/15/2002 7:04:39 PM, Daniel Honig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hello, > With this in mind I'd like to announce that I've got some time on my >hands. Probably too much. So I'd like to attempt to get out of lurker >mode and start helping out the committers. Can someone give me some >direction as to some bugs >that might be good to look at. > I'll probaby spend half a day getting up to speed on catctus and the test >framework which is crucial for any patches I might suggest. But I'd love >to have a few of the committers deputize me to go off and inspect some >issues. I've been collaborating with a couple guys on a tag library for >WML. >They've had to do most of the work until now so part of my effort is going >to be helping them validate it and get it ready for review >by the larger community. > > >-Daniel > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 6:50 PM >To: Struts Developers List >Subject: Re: Future Release Suggestion > > >As Craig pointed out recently, we all really do this for our own use, and if >someone else can use it too, then >that's "icing on the cake". > >Most of the Committers are highly enough placed in their own organizations >that they can use the nightly build >if they have to. So, the pressure to make incremental releases has not been >so great. > >But a good portion of my income now comes from working with teams that are >prohibited from using betas or a >nightly build. So, to keep shoes on the kids, I'm going to need to work >toward more incremental releases, so >that my clients can use it (and so they can in turn use me ;0) > >But, yes, I think that down the road we will need to start looking for >reasons to cut a release. If we have >several releases a year, then there will be less pressure to slip in one >more "gotta have it", since the next >release won't be so far away. > >Of course, at this point the die is cast, and we need to debug the features >already promised. > >-Ted. > > >10/15/2002 6:35:28 PM, David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>I think the problem is that some very heavy hitters were added into 1.1. >>Validator, sub modules, map backed form attributes, tiles, >RequestProcessor, >>Plugins, etc. are all new (AFAIK) to 1.1. This amount of change requires >>quite a while to accomplish. >> >>It may be beneficial in the future to address bug fixes and one big new >item >>per release. This way, production releases are more frequent. >> >>What do the comitters think? >> >>David >> >> >> >> >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Reply-To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>Subject: RE: Struts 1.1 Release >>>Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 23:25:40 +0100 >>> >>>I totally understand and agree with the release policy, but I think it's >>>worth remembering that a lot of these questions are driven by the >>>constraints of users' environments - e.g. in corporate environments like >>>ours, there any many people like myself continually fighting to get great >>>open source products like Struts into the organisation so that development >>>teams can use them, and the latest versions of them. However, this has to >>>be done within the processes and policies that apply to any third party >>>software, commercial or otherwise. >>> >>>Specifically, in our case, I am the product owner of Struts here among >>>other products from the Apache family of projects here and it is my >>>responsibility to make the standard builds of Struts on our software >>>distribution servers so that development can reference this for use by >>>their applications, as must be done for all external software (it's an >>>audit point). However, in order to do this, I must get the new version >>>approved by a central department which is extremely difficult, if not >>>impossible for software that is tagged as beta regardless of the quality. >>>(Yes, you can imagine how commercial software vendors deal with this in >>>their versioning policy... :-( ) Therefore, all our applications are >>>currently stuck on v1.0.2 rather than the latest and greatest 1.1 >>>regardless of how stable it may be in practice. I know that we are not >>>alone in this kind of approach, and that this kind of situation and red >>>tape is the reality in big organisations... >>> >>>Working in one of our architecture teams, I advise application development >>>teams in our area when it comes to working out and implementing their >>>roadmaps, and part of this requires the recommendation of technologies on >>>the basis of an understanding of when certain products such as Struts can >>>be made available for their use - this applies equally to any kind of >>>software. >>> >>>So I would be interested in hearing any suggestions about how we could >>>resolve the need for us to have a better understanding of how close we are >>>to a final release of any given version, e.g. clearly listing the issues >>>that are preventing a release being deemed as 1.1 quality on the website? >>>Would it be possible to change the versioning policy so that more non-beta >>>dot releases are made possible, since many components are known to have no >>>issues? These are just some ideas - they may well not be workable but I >>>would like to know what could be done, since it is very frustrating for me >>>and others like me to play with great "beta" products and rave about them >>>to colleagues, but not be able to make them available for use by their >>>applications - this ultimately results in a lack of interest and apathy >>>towards such products, which is a great shame given their quality. >>> >>>Hope something useful can come out of this! >>> >>>Best regards, >>> >>> >>>Kosh >>> >>> >-----Original Message----- >>> >From: Chappell, Simon P [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>> >Sent: 15 October 2002 22:58 >>> >To: Struts Users Mailing List >>> >Subject: RE: Struts 1.1 Release >>> > >>> > >>> >Were you subscribed to the mailing list earlier today when >>> >this was discussed? >>> > >>> >Struts 1.1 will be released when it's released. Period. No >>> >variation from that. >>> > >>> >That said, even the beta versions of Struts far exceed other >>> >software in terms of usefulness and reliability, so don't >>> >worry about formal release dates and just start using the thing. >>> > >>> >Simon >>> > >>> >----------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >Simon P. Chappell [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >Java Programming Specialist www.landsend.com >>> >Lands' End, Inc. (608) 935-4526 >>> > >>> > >>> >>-----Original Message----- >>> >>From: Bachan Sadanandan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>> >>Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 4:54 PM >>> >>To: Struts Users Mailing List >>> >>Subject: Struts 1.1 Release >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>Hi all, >>> >>Any idea when Struts 1.1 would be ready for Production .??? >>> >> >>> >>Thanks ! >>> >>Bachan >>> >> >>> >>-- >>> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>> >><mailto:struts-user->[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>For >>> >>additional commands, >>> >>e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > >>> >-- >>> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>> ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >For >>> >additional commands, e-mail: >>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> >>>Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com >>> >>>This message contains confidential information and is intended only >>>for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you >>>should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please >>>notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this >>>e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. >>> >>>E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free >>>as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, >>>arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore >>>does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents >>>of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If >>>verification is required please request a hard-copy version. This >>>message is provided for informational purposes and should not be >>>construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or >>>related financial instruments. >>> >>> >>>-- >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>For additional commands, e-mail: >>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>Internet access plans that fit your lifestyle -- join MSN. >>http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp >> >> >>-- >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>For additional commands, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> > > > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
