You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> on 2008/12/18 09:42:17 UTC
preparing for 2.1.0-M2
Hi,
I did what seems like my bi-annual review of all the unscheduled
issues today, reviewing and scheduling where appropriate. There's 10
left with open questions, and I'm making an early new years resolution
to keep on top of new reports :)
Jason, Shane - as instructed I put all the reported regressions with
trunk into 3.0-alpha-3. I expect some of these are already fixed so it
would be worth a run through them before releasing alpha-1 to see if
some can be closed out.
However, the main purpose was to identify reported regressions in
2.1.0-M1, of which we have a couple. So 2.1.0-M2 is down to about 11
issues including some patches to review. I updated the roadmap, moving
Doxia to M3 as they round out the 1.1 release. I also moved the
MNG-624 out to 2.2 (or beyond) while Ralph reviews his implementation.
Given enough time to wrap these up, I'd like to shoot for an M2
release by the end of the year. M3 and M4 could follow quickly since
the work is already done on branches.
Cheers,
Brett
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
Re: preparing for 2.1.0-M2
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 18/12/2008, at 8:07 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Dec 18, 2008, at 12:42 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I did what seems like my bi-annual review of all the unscheduled
>> issues today, reviewing and scheduling where appropriate. There's
>> 10 left with open questions, and I'm making an early new years
>> resolution to keep on top of new reports :)
>>
>> Jason, Shane - as instructed I put all the reported regressions
>> with trunk into 3.0-alpha-3. I expect some of these are already
>> fixed so it would be worth a run through them before releasing
>> alpha-1 to see if some can be closed out.
>>
>> However, the main purpose was to identify reported regressions in
>> 2.1.0-M1, of which we have a couple. So 2.1.0-M2 is down to about
>> 11 issues including some patches to review. I updated the roadmap,
>> moving Doxia to M3 as they round out the 1.1 release. I also moved
>> the MNG-624 out to 2.2 (or beyond) while Ralph reviews his
>> implementation.
>>
>> Given enough time to wrap these up, I'd like to shoot for an M2
>> release by the end of the year. M3 and M4 could follow quickly
>> since the work is already done on branches.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Brett
>
> Frankly, I haven't really done much with 624 since ApacheCon
> primarily because I got the impression that 2.1 has stalled and 3.0
> is going to beat it out. Since I've been told that the issue will be
> fixed in 3.0 I wasn't sure it would be worth the effort. If 2.1 is
> going to pick up momentum then I will look at fixing the problems
> during my time off during Christmas.
Cool... it'd certainly be better to have it in 2.1 if the problems can
be sorted out given the popularity of the issue :)
Cheers,
Brett
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: preparing for 2.1.0-M2
Posted by John Casey <jd...@commonjava.org>.
The whole point of choosing sweetheart issues for the 2.1 roadmap was so
that those developers driving certain issues would have a natural
inclination to help push out new milestones. I was hoping this would
help keep 2.1 from bogging down...
Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Dec 18, 2008, at 12:42 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I did what seems like my bi-annual review of all the unscheduled
>> issues today, reviewing and scheduling where appropriate. There's 10
>> left with open questions, and I'm making an early new years resolution
>> to keep on top of new reports :)
>>
>> Jason, Shane - as instructed I put all the reported regressions with
>> trunk into 3.0-alpha-3. I expect some of these are already fixed so it
>> would be worth a run through them before releasing alpha-1 to see if
>> some can be closed out.
>>
>> However, the main purpose was to identify reported regressions in
>> 2.1.0-M1, of which we have a couple. So 2.1.0-M2 is down to about 11
>> issues including some patches to review. I updated the roadmap, moving
>> Doxia to M3 as they round out the 1.1 release. I also moved the
>> MNG-624 out to 2.2 (or beyond) while Ralph reviews his implementation.
>>
>> Given enough time to wrap these up, I'd like to shoot for an M2
>> release by the end of the year. M3 and M4 could follow quickly since
>> the work is already done on branches.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Brett
>
> Frankly, I haven't really done much with 624 since ApacheCon primarily
> because I got the impression that 2.1 has stalled and 3.0 is going to
> beat it out. Since I've been told that the issue will be fixed in 3.0 I
> wasn't sure it would be worth the effort. If 2.1 is going to pick up
> momentum then I will look at fixing the problems during my time off
> during Christmas.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: preparing for 2.1.0-M2
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
On Dec 18, 2008, at 12:42 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I did what seems like my bi-annual review of all the unscheduled
> issues today, reviewing and scheduling where appropriate. There's 10
> left with open questions, and I'm making an early new years
> resolution to keep on top of new reports :)
>
> Jason, Shane - as instructed I put all the reported regressions with
> trunk into 3.0-alpha-3. I expect some of these are already fixed so
> it would be worth a run through them before releasing alpha-1 to see
> if some can be closed out.
>
> However, the main purpose was to identify reported regressions in
> 2.1.0-M1, of which we have a couple. So 2.1.0-M2 is down to about 11
> issues including some patches to review. I updated the roadmap,
> moving Doxia to M3 as they round out the 1.1 release. I also moved
> the MNG-624 out to 2.2 (or beyond) while Ralph reviews his
> implementation.
>
> Given enough time to wrap these up, I'd like to shoot for an M2
> release by the end of the year. M3 and M4 could follow quickly since
> the work is already done on branches.
>
> Cheers,
> Brett
Frankly, I haven't really done much with 624 since ApacheCon primarily
because I got the impression that 2.1 has stalled and 3.0 is going to
beat it out. Since I've been told that the issue will be fixed in 3.0
I wasn't sure it would be worth the effort. If 2.1 is going to pick
up momentum then I will look at fixing the problems during my time off
during Christmas.
Ralph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: preparing for 2.1.0-M2
Posted by John Casey <jd...@commonjava.org>.
I appreciate that, I was only trying to point out that I don't have the
time right now to drive another release like the last one...it might
kill me. :-)
Jason van Zyl wrote:
> In summary I'm saying you were the release manager. Not that it's your
> process. If you want to pass on the torch that's cool. But that decision
> is yours. Our process isn't as nearly as good as we might like to think
> and someone doing the releases for a couple quarters in my opinion is a
> good thing. All I'm highlighting is that it's your call as the existing
> defacto release manager.
>
> On 18-Dec-08, at 12:06 PM, John Casey wrote:
>
>> Two things I definitely want to highlight here:
>>
>> 1. This is not my process. I'm obviously interested in getting Maven
>> releases out the door, and having them be of the highest quality we
>> can achieve. This means there is no way I can be the gatekeeper on
>> every release; I simply don't have that kind of time, particularly
>> since there are plugins that need attention and like others, I have
>> other responsibilities at a day job that don't always leave me time to
>> head up these efforts. I appreciate the sentiment, of course, but this
>> has to be a group effort with everyone dedicated to timely, stable
>> releases.
>>
>> 2. To me, the goal of high quality releases starts and ends with test
>> coverage. We are all capable of putting together very deliberate,
>> targeted tests for the things we're working on, if we take the time to
>> do it. What I'm getting at is it's not enough to apply a patch or fix
>> a bug; the developer that introduces this sort of code also has a
>> responsibility to contribute tests for the new code and any old code
>> that it modifies. The idea is to prevent regressions, and validate our
>> assertions, so we don't all look like horses' asses by saying
>> something works when it doesn't...which is a sensation I think we've
>> all felt in the past.
>>
>> Whatever else we include in a particular Maven release, we should make
>> it top priority to keep making net progress in terms of functional
>> test coverage (not just the graphs produced by cobertura or emma). I
>> think we hit a milestone with 2.1.0-M1 in terms of this, but we really
>> need to continue improvement here. Benjamin's work in this department
>> IMO is some of the most important work being done in Maven anywhere,
>> and I applaud him for it.
>>
>> This is how I think about new code changes: If it doesn't have a test,
>> it shouldn't be included in a release. If the code it changes doesn't
>> have tests, then it still shouldn't be included in a release.
>>
>> My two cents...
>>
>> -john
>>
>> Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>> On 18-Dec-08, at 3:42 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I did what seems like my bi-annual review of all the unscheduled
>>>> issues today, reviewing and scheduling where appropriate. There's 10
>>>> left with open questions, and I'm making an early new years
>>>> resolution to keep on top of new reports :)
>>>>
>>>> Jason, Shane - as instructed I put all the reported regressions with
>>>> trunk into 3.0-alpha-3. I expect some of these are already fixed so
>>>> it would be worth a run through them before releasing alpha-1 to see
>>>> if some can be closed out.
>>>>
>>> If they have an IT and they work close them. But I don't think we can
>>> close the issues without an IT which is why I've honestly not gone
>>> after them even though I know some of them work from observation.
>>> Benjamin might have some hiding out somewhere.
>>>> However, the main purpose was to identify reported regressions in
>>>> 2.1.0-M1, of which we have a couple. So 2.1.0-M2 is down to about 11
>>>> issues including some patches to review. I updated the roadmap,
>>>> moving Doxia to M3 as they round out the 1.1 release. I also moved
>>>> the MNG-624 out to 2.2 (or beyond) while Ralph reviews his
>>>> implementation.
>>>>
>>>> Given enough time to wrap these up, I'd like to shoot for an M2
>>>> release by the end of the year. M3 and M4 could follow quickly since
>>>> the work is already done on branches.
>>>>
>>> I think here again you need to defer to the massive amount of work
>>> John did for the release. As far as I'm concerned that's his call as
>>> he's the defacto release manager. If he wants to hand it off that's
>>> fine.
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Brett
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Brett Porter
>>>> brett@apache.org
>>>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jason
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>> Jason van Zyl
>>> Founder, Apache Maven
>>> jason at sonatype dot com
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>> You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in.
>>> No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow.
>>> They know it is going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically
>>> dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of
>>> dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or
>>> goals are in doubt.
>>> -- Robert Pirzig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder, Apache Maven
> jason at sonatype dot com
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Three people can keep a secret provided two of them are dead.
>
> -- Unknown
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: preparing for 2.1.0-M2
Posted by Jason van Zyl <jv...@sonatype.com>.
In summary I'm saying you were the release manager. Not that it's your
process. If you want to pass on the torch that's cool. But that
decision is yours. Our process isn't as nearly as good as we might
like to think and someone doing the releases for a couple quarters in
my opinion is a good thing. All I'm highlighting is that it's your
call as the existing defacto release manager.
On 18-Dec-08, at 12:06 PM, John Casey wrote:
> Two things I definitely want to highlight here:
>
> 1. This is not my process. I'm obviously interested in getting Maven
> releases out the door, and having them be of the highest quality we
> can achieve. This means there is no way I can be the gatekeeper on
> every release; I simply don't have that kind of time, particularly
> since there are plugins that need attention and like others, I have
> other responsibilities at a day job that don't always leave me time
> to head up these efforts. I appreciate the sentiment, of course, but
> this has to be a group effort with everyone dedicated to timely,
> stable releases.
>
> 2. To me, the goal of high quality releases starts and ends with
> test coverage. We are all capable of putting together very
> deliberate, targeted tests for the things we're working on, if we
> take the time to do it. What I'm getting at is it's not enough to
> apply a patch or fix a bug; the developer that introduces this sort
> of code also has a responsibility to contribute tests for the new
> code and any old code that it modifies. The idea is to prevent
> regressions, and validate our assertions, so we don't all look like
> horses' asses by saying something works when it doesn't...which is a
> sensation I think we've all felt in the past.
>
> Whatever else we include in a particular Maven release, we should
> make it top priority to keep making net progress in terms of
> functional test coverage (not just the graphs produced by cobertura
> or emma). I think we hit a milestone with 2.1.0-M1 in terms of this,
> but we really need to continue improvement here. Benjamin's work in
> this department IMO is some of the most important work being done in
> Maven anywhere, and I applaud him for it.
>
> This is how I think about new code changes: If it doesn't have a
> test, it shouldn't be included in a release. If the code it changes
> doesn't have tests, then it still shouldn't be included in a release.
>
> My two cents...
>
> -john
>
> Jason van Zyl wrote:
>> On 18-Dec-08, at 3:42 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I did what seems like my bi-annual review of all the unscheduled
>>> issues today, reviewing and scheduling where appropriate. There's
>>> 10 left with open questions, and I'm making an early new years
>>> resolution to keep on top of new reports :)
>>>
>>> Jason, Shane - as instructed I put all the reported regressions
>>> with trunk into 3.0-alpha-3. I expect some of these are already
>>> fixed so it would be worth a run through them before releasing
>>> alpha-1 to see if some can be closed out.
>>>
>> If they have an IT and they work close them. But I don't think we
>> can close the issues without an IT which is why I've honestly not
>> gone after them even though I know some of them work from
>> observation. Benjamin might have some hiding out somewhere.
>>> However, the main purpose was to identify reported regressions in
>>> 2.1.0-M1, of which we have a couple. So 2.1.0-M2 is down to about
>>> 11 issues including some patches to review. I updated the roadmap,
>>> moving Doxia to M3 as they round out the 1.1 release. I also moved
>>> the MNG-624 out to 2.2 (or beyond) while Ralph reviews his
>>> implementation.
>>>
>>> Given enough time to wrap these up, I'd like to shoot for an M2
>>> release by the end of the year. M3 and M4 could follow quickly
>>> since the work is already done on branches.
>>>
>> I think here again you need to defer to the massive amount of work
>> John did for the release. As far as I'm concerned that's his call
>> as he's the defacto release manager. If he wants to hand it off
>> that's fine.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Brett
>>>
>>> --
>>> Brett Porter
>>> brett@apache.org
>>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jason
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder, Apache Maven
>> jason at sonatype dot com
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in.
>> No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise
>> tomorrow.
>> They know it is going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically
>> dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of
>> dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or
>> goals are in doubt.
>> -- Robert Pirzig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
Three people can keep a secret provided two of them are dead.
-- Unknown
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: preparing for 2.1.0-M2
Posted by John Casey <jd...@commonjava.org>.
Two things I definitely want to highlight here:
1. This is not my process. I'm obviously interested in getting Maven
releases out the door, and having them be of the highest quality we can
achieve. This means there is no way I can be the gatekeeper on every
release; I simply don't have that kind of time, particularly since there
are plugins that need attention and like others, I have other
responsibilities at a day job that don't always leave me time to head up
these efforts. I appreciate the sentiment, of course, but this has to be
a group effort with everyone dedicated to timely, stable releases.
2. To me, the goal of high quality releases starts and ends with test
coverage. We are all capable of putting together very deliberate,
targeted tests for the things we're working on, if we take the time to
do it. What I'm getting at is it's not enough to apply a patch or fix a
bug; the developer that introduces this sort of code also has a
responsibility to contribute tests for the new code and any old code
that it modifies. The idea is to prevent regressions, and validate our
assertions, so we don't all look like horses' asses by saying something
works when it doesn't...which is a sensation I think we've all felt in
the past.
Whatever else we include in a particular Maven release, we should make
it top priority to keep making net progress in terms of functional test
coverage (not just the graphs produced by cobertura or emma). I think we
hit a milestone with 2.1.0-M1 in terms of this, but we really need to
continue improvement here. Benjamin's work in this department IMO is
some of the most important work being done in Maven anywhere, and I
applaud him for it.
This is how I think about new code changes: If it doesn't have a test,
it shouldn't be included in a release. If the code it changes doesn't
have tests, then it still shouldn't be included in a release.
My two cents...
-john
Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On 18-Dec-08, at 3:42 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I did what seems like my bi-annual review of all the unscheduled
>> issues today, reviewing and scheduling where appropriate. There's 10
>> left with open questions, and I'm making an early new years resolution
>> to keep on top of new reports :)
>>
>> Jason, Shane - as instructed I put all the reported regressions with
>> trunk into 3.0-alpha-3. I expect some of these are already fixed so it
>> would be worth a run through them before releasing alpha-1 to see if
>> some can be closed out.
>>
>
> If they have an IT and they work close them. But I don't think we can
> close the issues without an IT which is why I've honestly not gone after
> them even though I know some of them work from observation. Benjamin
> might have some hiding out somewhere.
>
>> However, the main purpose was to identify reported regressions in
>> 2.1.0-M1, of which we have a couple. So 2.1.0-M2 is down to about 11
>> issues including some patches to review. I updated the roadmap, moving
>> Doxia to M3 as they round out the 1.1 release. I also moved the
>> MNG-624 out to 2.2 (or beyond) while Ralph reviews his implementation.
>>
>> Given enough time to wrap these up, I'd like to shoot for an M2
>> release by the end of the year. M3 and M4 could follow quickly since
>> the work is already done on branches.
>>
>
> I think here again you need to defer to the massive amount of work John
> did for the release. As far as I'm concerned that's his call as he's the
> defacto release manager. If he wants to hand it off that's fine.
>
>> Cheers,
>> Brett
>>
>> --
>> Brett Porter
>> brett@apache.org
>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder, Apache Maven
> jason at sonatype dot com
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in.
> No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow.
> They know it is going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically
> dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of
> dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or
> goals are in doubt.
>
> -- Robert Pirzig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: preparing for 2.1.0-M2
Posted by Jason van Zyl <jv...@sonatype.com>.
On 18-Dec-08, at 3:42 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I did what seems like my bi-annual review of all the unscheduled
> issues today, reviewing and scheduling where appropriate. There's 10
> left with open questions, and I'm making an early new years
> resolution to keep on top of new reports :)
>
> Jason, Shane - as instructed I put all the reported regressions with
> trunk into 3.0-alpha-3. I expect some of these are already fixed so
> it would be worth a run through them before releasing alpha-1 to see
> if some can be closed out.
>
If they have an IT and they work close them. But I don't think we can
close the issues without an IT which is why I've honestly not gone
after them even though I know some of them work from observation.
Benjamin might have some hiding out somewhere.
> However, the main purpose was to identify reported regressions in
> 2.1.0-M1, of which we have a couple. So 2.1.0-M2 is down to about 11
> issues including some patches to review. I updated the roadmap,
> moving Doxia to M3 as they round out the 1.1 release. I also moved
> the MNG-624 out to 2.2 (or beyond) while Ralph reviews his
> implementation.
>
> Given enough time to wrap these up, I'd like to shoot for an M2
> release by the end of the year. M3 and M4 could follow quickly since
> the work is already done on branches.
>
I think here again you need to defer to the massive amount of work
John did for the release. As far as I'm concerned that's his call as
he's the defacto release manager. If he wants to hand it off that's
fine.
> Cheers,
> Brett
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in.
No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow.
They know it is going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically
dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of
dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or
goals are in doubt.
-- Robert Pirzig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org