On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:16, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Hyrum K Wright <hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org> wrote:
>> Fire up your testing environments: they're going to get some use over
>> the next couple of months.
>>
>> In an effort to release early and often, I'd like to cut the first
>> 1.7.0 pre-release on June 1. This will likely be a beta release,
>> since there are still blocking issues, but I hope to get this into the
>> hands of users (and third-party consumers) soon-ish.
>>
>> From that point, we'll continue to release beta's until we branch,
>> which will be when the "1.7.0" issues are all closed. After the
>> branch, we'll start the release candidates and the soak period.
>
> I am +1 on doing pre-release build(s) if you want to, but if this is
> the group statement coming out of Berlin this is pretty weak. You
> have more SVN contributors in the room then there are open issues. It
> seems like we ought to be able to make a statement with a good degree
> of confidence on when we will branch for the release and issue the
> release candidate. If nothing else, we should be seeing a flood of
> new issues being added to the milestone. If the people in the room
> cannot identify the reasons to not do the release .. and put them in
> the issue tracker. Then what is blocking us? Why can't the remaining
> issues all be closed by June 1?
>
> I realize the way you worded this statement leaves that open as a
> possibility, but with single digit open issues we ought to be able to
> make a stronger statement as to when we *think* we will be ready for
> release candidate.
If solving these were easy, then I believe they would have been done
by now. We're down to the hard issues, and people don't have a high
degree of confidence in planning when they would be done.
I'm also not seeing anybody here standing up and whipping us into
coming up with a date. People seem pretty content with "we're working
on it as best we can."
Cheers,
-g
Received on 2011-05-18 13:26:01 CEST