You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to phoenix-dev@avalon.apache.org by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org> on 2002/06/30 22:00:31 UTC

[VOTE] Re: Phoenix beta.

oh, and marking as "[VOTE]" so everyone'll read it =)

-LSD

On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 21:57, Leo Simons wrote:
> until this one:
> 
> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9411
> 
> is closed, -1. It's marked as "blocker", innit?
> 
> Other than that, if pete is done with the cleanup he's been doing, +1.
> 
> Are you gonna do release mgmt on it?
> 
> grz,
> 
> - LSD
> 
> On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 20:04, Paul Hammant wrote:
> > Folks,
> > 
> > Can we release the current Phoenix as beta instead of 4.0a4 ?  Here is my +1
> > 
> > - Paul
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>


Re: [VOTE] Re: Phoenix beta.

Posted by Paul Hammant <Pa...@yahoo.com>.
Peter,

>On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 16:04, Leo Simons wrote:
>  
>
>>hmm. Same thought crossed my mind; the part important to me is the
>>"couple of months". We've been saying/thinking similar stuff for quite
>>some time now.
>>
>>If we can agree on how many "a couple" is, just about (3 as opposed to
>>9), then I completely agree.
>>    
>>
>
>a couple == when its done ;)
>

Can we do this XP style?

Which of four variables are we not going to fix for beta1 :

  Cost
  Time
  Quality
  Scope

I am voting for a fixing of scope and quality.  I am suggesting time and 
cost are not fixed.

If all in agreement, can we fix scope now, as it is the only one of the 
two that requires a list rather than intent.  Once fixed we allow 
*nothing* else in.

- Paul
 



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>


Re: [VOTE] Re: Phoenix beta.

Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 2002-07-01 at 08:23, Peter Donald wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 16:04, Leo Simons wrote:
> > hmm. Same thought crossed my mind; the part important to me is the
> > "couple of months". We've been saying/thinking similar stuff for quite
> > some time now.
> >
> > If we can agree on how many "a couple" is, just about (3 as opposed to
> > 9), then I completely agree.
> 
> a couple == when its done ;)

:) it is a shame the bizzniss doesn't work that way, too. I'll end up
supporting 4 different alphas...no prob tho'

- LSD




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>


Re: [VOTE] Re: Phoenix beta.

Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 16:04, Leo Simons wrote:
> hmm. Same thought crossed my mind; the part important to me is the
> "couple of months". We've been saying/thinking similar stuff for quite
> some time now.
>
> If we can agree on how many "a couple" is, just about (3 as opposed to
> 9), then I completely agree.

a couple == when its done ;)

-- 
Cheers,

Peter Donald
---------------------------------------------------
"Wise men don't need advice. Fools don't take it." 
                        -Benjamin Franklin 
--------------------------------------------------- 


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>


Re: [VOTE] Re: Phoenix beta.

Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
hmm. Same thought crossed my mind; the part important to me is the
"couple of months". We've been saying/thinking similar stuff for quite
some time now.

If we can agree on how many "a couple" is, just about (3 as opposed to
9), then I completely agree.

But I am in need of a release at some not-quite-far-point in time.
Thoughts?

grz,

- Leo


On Mon, 2002-07-01 at 00:15, Stephen McConnell wrote:
> 
> Leo:
> 
> I would really like to hold off on this for a couple of months.  Reason 
> why is that I would love to see Phoenix block defintions drop in sync 
> with the containerkit xinfo  model - and I don't want to push that any 
> faster than current progress.  Given that change - and the 
> synchrnoization of the Avalon Apps blocks to the containerkit xinfo 
> format - then I would be a lot happier about Phoenix going beta.
> 
> Take a look at the following url for an overview of the containerkit 
> xinfo format:
> http://home.osm.net/doc/containerkit/org/apache/excalibur/containerkit/infobuilder/package-summary.html
> 
> Steve.
> 
> 
> 
> Leo Simons wrote:
> 
> >oh, and marking as "[VOTE]" so everyone'll read it =)
> >
> >-LSD
> >
> >On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 21:57, Leo Simons wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>until this one:
> >>
> >>http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9411
> >>
> >>is closed, -1. It's marked as "blocker", innit?
> >>
> >>Other than that, if pete is done with the cleanup he's been doing, +1.
> >>
> >>Are you gonna do release mgmt on it?
> >>
> >>grz,
> >>
> >>- LSD
> >>
> >>On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 20:04, Paul Hammant wrote:
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Folks,
> >>>
> >>>Can we release the current Phoenix as beta instead of 4.0a4 ?  Here is my +1
> >>>
> >>>- Paul
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> -- 
> 
> Stephen J. McConnell
> 
> OSM SARL
> digital products for a global economy
> mailto:mcconnell@osm.net
> http://www.osm.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>


Re: [VOTE] Re: Phoenix beta.

Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@osm.net>.
Leo:

I would really like to hold off on this for a couple of months.  Reason 
why is that I would love to see Phoenix block defintions drop in sync 
with the containerkit xinfo  model - and I don't want to push that any 
faster than current progress.  Given that change - and the 
synchrnoization of the Avalon Apps blocks to the containerkit xinfo 
format - then I would be a lot happier about Phoenix going beta.

Take a look at the following url for an overview of the containerkit 
xinfo format:
http://home.osm.net/doc/containerkit/org/apache/excalibur/containerkit/infobuilder/package-summary.html

Steve.



Leo Simons wrote:

>oh, and marking as "[VOTE]" so everyone'll read it =)
>
>-LSD
>
>On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 21:57, Leo Simons wrote:
>  
>
>>until this one:
>>
>>http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9411
>>
>>is closed, -1. It's marked as "blocker", innit?
>>
>>Other than that, if pete is done with the cleanup he's been doing, +1.
>>
>>Are you gonna do release mgmt on it?
>>
>>grz,
>>
>>- LSD
>>
>>On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 20:04, Paul Hammant wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Folks,
>>>
>>>Can we release the current Phoenix as beta instead of 4.0a4 ?  Here is my +1
>>>
>>>- Paul
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>  
>

-- 

Stephen J. McConnell

OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:mcconnell@osm.net
http://www.osm.net




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>