Christoph, Thanks for the feedback. I have replied below to address your issues.
cheers. -chris On Nov 22, 4:39 am, Christoph Zwerschke <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 22.11.2010 05:49 schrieb percious: > > > That's about the most negative response I've seen in sometime. Yes, I > > could have held up the 2.1 release, I saw this happen back in the days > > of 0.8/1.0 TG, and it ultimately hurt the community. > > There are many things which hurt the community. > > As you also pointed out, we have many users who are not very experienced > yet, and we also want to be attractive to new users. For both of these > people, proper docs are a crucial issue. > > Therefore in the last time on tg-trunk we talked a lot about how to > improve the docs before releasing 2.1 so that when it comes out, people > would have a good impression and experience. That's why I worked quite a > bit on a new layout and Sphinx theme and reserved time for the doc > sprint. But it was cancelled, there was no alternate date, and when I > suggested a new doc sprint on the mailing list last week, nobody > answered, so I think it's fair for me to say that "nobody cared". Maybe > my response was negative, but yes, I am disappointed about that. Where is this work located? I'd like to get it integrated. I had assumed that the work that had gone into making the docs match the existing website was completed at pycon. > > Well, stuff happens, so we can always change our plans and priorities. > My point is that when plans are altered then this should be discussed or > at least communicated. Therefore we have our mailing lists [2]. I'm not > on IRC all day and honestly had no idea that the 2.1 release was going > to happen last weekend. I was also a bit annoyed because tickets from > the 2.1 final milestone were postponed or closed without comment and > without giving people a chance for feedback before the release. I hear you on this. I will try and comment better. The problem was that I had about 40 tickets to go through and I wanted to do this before the release. The 2.1rc1 release was cut without anyone moving the open tickets forward, and the milestone was closed leaving a number of "dead" tickets. I revived them and moved them to the appropriate places. My involvement with the rc1 release was limited to actually creating the TG eggs and putting them in the index, I wanted to make sure we were caught up for the formal release. The great thing about a ticketing system is that you may open tickets that may have been closed in error. > > My wish for the future is that the dates for important releases such as > 2.1 are announced beforehand, and we can have a sprint with everybody > who cares where we try to fix the open tickets for the milestone or > decide together which need to be postponed, test everything in different > environments [1], and brush up the docs and release notes. My problem with announcing when TG will be released is that missing a release deadline is more detrimental to the community than stealth releasing. My real life schedule has been hectic lately, resulting in a delayed release candidate and formal release, so I sort of have to release when there is time. I would be willing to announce a plan for a release in the TG-trunk ml, or even to you personally if that makes sense. The other issue is that doing release by committee sets us up for not releasing at all. I am happy to cut 2.1.x releases whenever we deem them important. I see at least 10 tickets that we can solve quickly for the next release, and it is my belief that people find 2.1.1 releases more appealing in general. Getting 2.1 out the door sets us up for much better release process in the future. > > I hope you don't misunderstand me. You've done a lot, try to push TG 2 > forward and we all appreciate that. But there are issues which cannot be > solved by you working even more and harder on TG 2. They can only be > solved by having better communication and release management [2] that > gets all committers and new people involved instead of getting them > accustomed that you're doing everything for them anyway. > > -- Christoph > > [1] I noticed that some tickets you closed as "worksforme" still did not > work for me, because I had different versions of Paste, Pylons or > repoze.who/what.xyz, webutils etc. Tried to adapt some required > versions, not sure if these changes made it into the release. Please reopen those tickets. > > [2]http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/releasemanagement.xml > > "When preparing a new release, the release manager needs to determine > its scope and planning. They should involve the committers and users and > seek some level of agreement from them about the scope and planning of > the release. This is because the users will play a very important role > in testing the prospective release and adopting the release once it has > been made final. For this reason, all communication about the scope and > planning of the release should be publicly accessible, for example via a > public mailing list." -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears?hl=en.
