Patches/submissions tracking & release schedule for 1.4

[Jérôme Lacoste <je...@smartcardsystem.com>]

2 points in this mail

** I remember a mail regarding the queuing of submissions. I know that this
is done informally, but it would be nice if the submissions could be added
to a queue so that we could see the state of them.
If I say that it is because I submitted the Attr task some weeks ago and it
seems not to be in the main.
Not that I think that the task is great, but it would be interesting to know
what's going on :)
SourceForge is doing Patch tracking, and I think that's good.
A simple implementation could be to do it by emailing to the Ant-dev list
(copying to the submitter) on submission state change. E.g. new, accepted,
reviewed, refused, merged....


** It has been said many times that there have been many changes in Ant 1.3
nightly compared to 1.3. As there is not yet any deadline for 1.4, isn't
that disturbing?

I know, I just ask questions, and do not solve them. I am also grateful to
the maintainers for doing such a great job.

Jerome

Re: Patches/submissions tracking & release schedule for 1.4

[Peter Donald <do...@apache.org>]

On Fri,  6 Jul 2001 02:28, Jérôme Lacoste wrote:
> 2 points in this mail
>
> ** I remember a mail regarding the queuing of submissions. I know that this
> is done informally, but it would be nice if the submissions could be added
> to a queue so that we could see the state of them.
> If I say that it is because I submitted the Attr task some weeks ago and it
> seems not to be in the main.
> Not that I think that the task is great, but it would be interesting to
> know what's going on :)
> SourceForge is doing Patch tracking, and I think that's good.
> A simple implementation could be to do it by emailing to the Ant-dev list
> (copying to the submitter) on submission state change. E.g. new, accepted,
> reviewed, refused, merged....

It is a good idea, suggested in past but no one has actually implemented it 
yet ;)

> ** It has been said many times that there have been many changes in Ant 1.3
> nightly compared to 1.3. As there is not yet any deadline for 1.4, isn't
> that disturbing?

Releases get done when somone volunteers to be a Release Manager. Until then 
there is the nightly builds that anyone can pick up. 

Cheers,

Pete

*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof."                   |
|              - John Kenneth Galbraith               |
*-----------------------------------------------------*

RE: Patches/submissions tracking & release schedule for 1.4

[Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jérôme Lacoste [mailto:jerome.lacoste@smartcardsystem.com]
> Sent: Friday, 6 July 2001 2:28 AM
> To: Ant Dev
> Subject: Patches/submissions tracking & release schedule for 1.4
>
>
> 2 points in this mail
>
> ** I remember a mail regarding the queuing of submissions. I know
> that this
> is done informally, but it would be nice if the submissions could be added
> to a queue so that we could see the state of them.

You can submit patches as enhancements or bug fixes to bugzilla. In fact
that makes it easier for me to track them and committers can sign up for the
patch.

> If I say that it is because I submitted the Attr task some weeks
> ago and it
> seems not to be in the main.
> Not that I think that the task is great, but it would be
> interesting to know
> what's going on :)
> SourceForge is doing Patch tracking, and I think that's good.
> A simple implementation could be to do it by emailing to the Ant-dev list
> (copying to the submitter) on submission state change. E.g. new, accepted,
> reviewed, refused, merged....

Bugzilla will do that, emailing the submitter and the assignee. I think that
should be OK. For the immediate future I will be focussing on resolving
outstanding issues on bugzilla.

>
>
> ** It has been said many times that there have been many changes
> in Ant 1.3
> nightly compared to 1.3. As there is not yet any deadline for 1.4, isn't
> that disturbing?

No, why would it be? :-)

Thanks
Conor