Hello All,
I know everyone is very busy with the .9 release. I looked at trac,
but it is hard for
me to understand what are the show stopper tickets.
It seems like there are 2 big releases being thought about
0.9 - bugs in trac (less widget, less ????)
1.0 - widget
Couple of observations:
- there is still alot of tickets against 0.9
- there are many tickets against 0.9
- 1.0 implies some stabliity
- most people are running TurboGears out of SVN to pick up the new
features
Proposal:
- change to fixed-length time-boxed iterations ~2-4 weeks??
- change thought pattern from 0.9 and 1.0 to: .9, .91 (4 weeks
later, .92 (4 weeks after that), ..... 1.0 when API's stabilize.
Benifits:
- value is delivered at know intervals
- testing would be able to occur against release
- confidence would be gained in TurboGears ability to
- fix bug
- test
- release with bug fixes at regular interval.
What would release Plan look like:
0.9 - Identify showstopper tickets, and move the rest of the tickets to
0.91 release
0.91 - back log of tickets from 0.9
0.92 - The tickets that are fixed 2-4 weeks from 0.91, at that time,
move backlog to 0.93.
0.93 - The tickets that are fixed 2-4 weeks from 0.92, at that time,
move backlog to 0.93
... rinse, repeat until widgets stabilize
1.0 - Stable API's for
- Widgets ??
- ???
Experimental APIs for:
- ???
I guess what I am proposing is:
- timebox iterations (even if few changes occur)
- for each release, identify:
stable API's (if they exist :-)
experimental API's
TurboGears is making excellent progress. I really like the direction
it is going in. It is just a personal opinion, but a fixed timebox for
iterations would be very useful.
Variable scope is fine with me. I am not looking for commitments to
scope. Time boxed releases would add value to TurboGears.
Proposal for a plan (please change where this is wrong):
- Show stopper tickets for 0.9 would need to be tagged
- A 0.91 release would need to be created in trac
- all non show-stoppers would need to be moved to 0.91 release
- An 0.91 SVN branch would need to be created (or 0.9 bugfix branch
would need to be created)
- head would move to 0.91, showstoppers would be fixed in 0.9 branch
- swarm over the show stoppers in the 0.9 release branch
The above approach and $3.75 will buy a highly caffinated drink. The
above are just suggestions ment to kick off a discussion on a release
plan.
Please pardon me if a release plan already exists, I looked at the
site, but missed it. My eyes aren't as good as they used to be.
Does this approach work?
How should it be changed?
Is something else in place?
Thanks to all, TurboGears has so much potential, I would really like
it to succeed.
Mike
