You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by debin lei <le...@apache.org> on 2012/06/21 04:39:05 UTC
[DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Hi, All
I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1 release
blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
release blocker?
Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from dev
view ?
I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things more
clear will be very helpful.
Thanks.
Best regards.
Lei De Bin
Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by Li Feng Wang <ph...@gmail.com>.
I think release blocker include crash, regression and data loss.
A more better definition of show stopper criteria can be found in the wiki
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Showstopper
2012/6/21 Dennis E. Hamilton <de...@acm.org>
> I think safety is of high value.
>
> That includes security issues and also data loss/corruption. The last
> includes crashers that result in unrecoverable loss of work. Hidden loss
> of work and document corruption that does not appear until the document is
> opened later is particularly serious.
>
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dongjun zong [mailto:zongdj001@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 20:31
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
>
> I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related issue
> should be considered as release blocker.
>
> 2012/6/21 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
>
> > From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set as
> > blocker
> >
> > 2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
> >
> > > Hi, All
> > > I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1
> release
> > > blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
> > > release blocker?
> > > Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from
> > dev
> > > view ?
> > > I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
> > > So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things
> more
> > > clear will be very helpful.
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Best regards.
> > > Lei De Bin
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
> >
>
>
--
Best Wishes, LiFeng Wang
Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by Chao Huang <ch...@gmail.com>.
2012/6/21 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>
> On 6/21/12 5:51 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> > I think safety is of high value.
> >
> > That includes security issues and also data loss/corruption. The last
> includes crashers that result in unrecoverable loss of work. Hidden loss
> of work and document corruption that does not appear until the document is
> opened later is particularly serious.
> >
>
>
> We used in general the following criteria (details where we are more
> less based on can be foud under [2])
>
> - crashes (including data loss/corruption)
> - security fixes
> - regressions
>
> I would also include
> - memory leaks
> when a fix is available and it is well tested that nothing else breaks
>
>
> - maintenance issues (like updating reference type library, version
> strings, images, ...)
>
>
> A micro release like 3.4.1 is only for fixing serious problems and not
> to introduce new features. Excepting new translations.
>
+1
>
> Minor releases, eg. 3.5, can include any kind of fix, features and
> improvements. Bigger UI changes should be discussed and probably better
> included in a major release.
>
+1
>
> See also [1] and especially [2]
>
> We should update these pages on demand to reflect our guideline how we
> want handle this in the future. A common understanding is of course
> important here.
>
+1
>
>
> Juergen
>
>
> [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria
> [2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Stopper
>
>
> > - Dennis
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dongjun zong [mailto:zongdj001@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 20:31
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
> >
> > I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related
> issue
> > should be considered as release blocker.
> >
> > 2012/6/21 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
> >
> >> From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set
> as
> >> blocker
> >>
> >> 2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
> >>
> >>> Hi, All
> >>> I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1
> release
> >>> blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
> >>> release blocker?
> >>> Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from
> >> dev
> >>> view ?
> >>> I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
> >>> So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things
> more
> >>> clear will be very helpful.
> >>> Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards.
> >>> Lei De Bin
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
> >>
> >
>
>
>
--
Best regards,
Chao Huang
Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Juergen,
发自我的 iPhone
在 2012-6-21，13:42，Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com> 写道：
> On 6/21/12 12:40 PM, Shenfeng Liu wrote:
>> I wonder if any one can help to update this criteria to 3.4.1 wiki ?
>
> I am not sure what you mean, do you mean to add a link on the wiki page
> to the definition of showstopper?
Yes, add a link if definition is already somewhere, or add a section in the wiki page to list the criteria, since as I remember this question was asked several times before... List it on wiki may not reduce the frequency of the asking in ooo-dev mail thread, but can save us from recalling what was answered last time. :-P
>
>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Feature+Planning
>
> by the way I moved this page under Releases -> AOO 3.4.1 but the link
> still works
>
> The idea was to reduce the redundant version number in each page name,
> see
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Unofficial+Developer+Snapshots
>
> But as I have noticed afterwards it doesn't really work because the page
> itself is under OOOUSERS directly. I thought it would be saved
> hierarchical as in mediawiki :-(
>
>
>> It was my favorite, but I'm on vacation now and difficult to update the wiki from my phone...
>
> enjoy your vacation
>
> Juergen
>
>>
>> - Simon
>>
>>
>> 发自我的 iPhone
>>
>> 在 2012-6-21，7:54，De Bin Lei <le...@apache.org> 写道：
>>
>>> Juergen, thank for your comments, now the criteria is more clear, thanks
>>> again.
>>>
>>> 2012/6/21 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>
>>>
>>>> On 6/21/12 5:51 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>>>> I think safety is of high value.
>>>>>
>>>>> That includes security issues and also data loss/corruption. The last
>>>> includes crashers that result in unrecoverable loss of work. Hidden loss
>>>> of work and document corruption that does not appear until the document is
>>>> opened later is particularly serious.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We used in general the following criteria (details where we are more
>>>> less based on can be foud under [2])
>>>>
>>>> - crashes (including data loss/corruption)
>>>> - security fixes
>>>> - regressions
>>>>
>>>> I would also include
>>>> - memory leaks
>>>> when a fix is available and it is well tested that nothing else breaks
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - maintenance issues (like updating reference type library, version
>>>> strings, images, ...)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A micro release like 3.4.1 is only for fixing serious problems and not
>>>> to introduce new features. Excepting new translations.
>>>>
>>>> Minor releases, eg. 3.5, can include any kind of fix, features and
>>>> improvements. Bigger UI changes should be discussed and probably better
>>>> included in a major release.
>>>>
>>>> See also [1] and especially [2]
>>>>
>>>> We should update these pages on demand to reflect our guideline how we
>>>> want handle this in the future. A common understanding is of course
>>>> important here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Juergen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria
>>>> [2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Stopper
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - Dennis
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: dongjun zong [mailto:zongdj001@gmail.com]
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 20:31
>>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related
>>>> issue
>>>>> should be considered as release blocker.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2012/6/21 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>> From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set
>>>> as
>>>>>> blocker
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi, All
>>>>>>> I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1
>>>> release
>>>>>>> blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
>>>>>>> release blocker?
>>>>>>> Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from
>>>>>> dev
>>>>>>> view ?
>>>>>>> I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
>>>>>>> So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things
>>>> more
>>>>>>> clear will be very helpful.
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards.
>>>>>>> Lei De Bin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Lei De Bin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On 6/21/12 1:42 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 6/21/12 12:40 PM, Shenfeng Liu wrote:
>> I wonder if any one can help to update this criteria to 3.4.1 wiki ?
>
> I am not sure what you mean, do you mean to add a link on the wiki page
> to the definition of showstopper?
>
>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Feature+Planning
>
> by the way I moved this page under Releases -> AOO 3.4.1 but the link
> still works
>
> The idea was to reduce the redundant version number in each page name,
> see
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Unofficial+Developer+Snapshots
>
> But as I have noticed afterwards it doesn't really work because the page
> itself is under OOOUSERS directly. I thought it would be saved
> hierarchical as in mediawiki :-(
>
changed back to include the version number but keeping the hierarchy
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Unofficial+Developer+Snapshots
Did I mentioned that I don't like confluence wiki :-(
Juergen
>
>> It was my favorite, but I'm on vacation now and difficult to update the wiki from my phone...
>
> enjoy your vacation
>
> Juergen
>
>>
>> - Simon
>>
>>
>> 发自我的 iPhone
>>
>> 在 2012-6-21，7:54，De Bin Lei <le...@apache.org> 写道：
>>
>>> Juergen, thank for your comments, now the criteria is more clear, thanks
>>> again.
>>>
>>> 2012/6/21 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>
>>>
>>>> On 6/21/12 5:51 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>>>> I think safety is of high value.
>>>>>
>>>>> That includes security issues and also data loss/corruption. The last
>>>> includes crashers that result in unrecoverable loss of work. Hidden loss
>>>> of work and document corruption that does not appear until the document is
>>>> opened later is particularly serious.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We used in general the following criteria (details where we are more
>>>> less based on can be foud under [2])
>>>>
>>>> - crashes (including data loss/corruption)
>>>> - security fixes
>>>> - regressions
>>>>
>>>> I would also include
>>>> - memory leaks
>>>> when a fix is available and it is well tested that nothing else breaks
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - maintenance issues (like updating reference type library, version
>>>> strings, images, ...)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A micro release like 3.4.1 is only for fixing serious problems and not
>>>> to introduce new features. Excepting new translations.
>>>>
>>>> Minor releases, eg. 3.5, can include any kind of fix, features and
>>>> improvements. Bigger UI changes should be discussed and probably better
>>>> included in a major release.
>>>>
>>>> See also [1] and especially [2]
>>>>
>>>> We should update these pages on demand to reflect our guideline how we
>>>> want handle this in the future. A common understanding is of course
>>>> important here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Juergen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria
>>>> [2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Stopper
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - Dennis
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: dongjun zong [mailto:zongdj001@gmail.com]
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 20:31
>>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related
>>>> issue
>>>>> should be considered as release blocker.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2012/6/21 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>> From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set
>>>> as
>>>>>> blocker
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi, All
>>>>>>> I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1
>>>> release
>>>>>>> blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
>>>>>>> release blocker?
>>>>>>> Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from
>>>>>> dev
>>>>>>> view ?
>>>>>>> I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
>>>>>>> So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things
>>>> more
>>>>>>> clear will be very helpful.
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards.
>>>>>>> Lei De Bin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Lei De Bin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On 6/21/12 12:40 PM, Shenfeng Liu wrote:
> I wonder if any one can help to update this criteria to 3.4.1 wiki ?
I am not sure what you mean, do you mean to add a link on the wiki page
to the definition of showstopper?
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Feature+Planning
by the way I moved this page under Releases -> AOO 3.4.1 but the link
still works
The idea was to reduce the redundant version number in each page name,
see
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Unofficial+Developer+Snapshots
But as I have noticed afterwards it doesn't really work because the page
itself is under OOOUSERS directly. I thought it would be saved
hierarchical as in mediawiki :-(
> It was my favorite, but I'm on vacation now and difficult to update the wiki from my phone...
enjoy your vacation
Juergen
>
> - Simon
>
>
> 发自我的 iPhone
>
> 在 2012-6-21，7:54，De Bin Lei <le...@apache.org> 写道：
>
>> Juergen, thank for your comments, now the criteria is more clear, thanks
>> again.
>>
>> 2012/6/21 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>
>>
>>> On 6/21/12 5:51 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>>> I think safety is of high value.
>>>>
>>>> That includes security issues and also data loss/corruption. The last
>>> includes crashers that result in unrecoverable loss of work. Hidden loss
>>> of work and document corruption that does not appear until the document is
>>> opened later is particularly serious.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We used in general the following criteria (details where we are more
>>> less based on can be foud under [2])
>>>
>>> - crashes (including data loss/corruption)
>>> - security fixes
>>> - regressions
>>>
>>> I would also include
>>> - memory leaks
>>> when a fix is available and it is well tested that nothing else breaks
>>>
>>>
>>> - maintenance issues (like updating reference type library, version
>>> strings, images, ...)
>>>
>>>
>>> A micro release like 3.4.1 is only for fixing serious problems and not
>>> to introduce new features. Excepting new translations.
>>>
>>> Minor releases, eg. 3.5, can include any kind of fix, features and
>>> improvements. Bigger UI changes should be discussed and probably better
>>> included in a major release.
>>>
>>> See also [1] and especially [2]
>>>
>>> We should update these pages on demand to reflect our guideline how we
>>> want handle this in the future. A common understanding is of course
>>> important here.
>>>
>>>
>>> Juergen
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria
>>> [2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Stopper
>>>
>>>
>>>> - Dennis
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: dongjun zong [mailto:zongdj001@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 20:31
>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
>>>>
>>>> I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related
>>> issue
>>>> should be considered as release blocker.
>>>>
>>>> 2012/6/21 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>> From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set
>>> as
>>>>> blocker
>>>>>
>>>>> 2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi, All
>>>>>> I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1
>>> release
>>>>>> blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
>>>>>> release blocker?
>>>>>> Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from
>>>>> dev
>>>>>> view ?
>>>>>> I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
>>>>>> So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things
>>> more
>>>>>> clear will be very helpful.
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards.
>>>>>> Lei De Bin
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards
>>> Lei De Bin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com>.
I wonder if any one can help to update this criteria to 3.4.1 wiki ?
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Feature+Planning
It was my favorite, but I'm on vacation now and difficult to update the wiki from my phone...
- Simon
发自我的 iPhone
在 2012-6-21，7:54，De Bin Lei <le...@apache.org> 写道：
> Juergen, thank for your comments, now the criteria is more clear, thanks
> again.
>
> 2012/6/21 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>
>
>> On 6/21/12 5:51 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>> I think safety is of high value.
>>>
>>> That includes security issues and also data loss/corruption. The last
>> includes crashers that result in unrecoverable loss of work. Hidden loss
>> of work and document corruption that does not appear until the document is
>> opened later is particularly serious.
>>>
>>
>>
>> We used in general the following criteria (details where we are more
>> less based on can be foud under [2])
>>
>> - crashes (including data loss/corruption)
>> - security fixes
>> - regressions
>>
>> I would also include
>> - memory leaks
>> when a fix is available and it is well tested that nothing else breaks
>>
>>
>> - maintenance issues (like updating reference type library, version
>> strings, images, ...)
>>
>>
>> A micro release like 3.4.1 is only for fixing serious problems and not
>> to introduce new features. Excepting new translations.
>>
>> Minor releases, eg. 3.5, can include any kind of fix, features and
>> improvements. Bigger UI changes should be discussed and probably better
>> included in a major release.
>>
>> See also [1] and especially [2]
>>
>> We should update these pages on demand to reflect our guideline how we
>> want handle this in the future. A common understanding is of course
>> important here.
>>
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>
>> [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria
>> [2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Stopper
>>
>>
>>> - Dennis
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: dongjun zong [mailto:zongdj001@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 20:31
>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
>>>
>>> I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related
>> issue
>>> should be considered as release blocker.
>>>
>>> 2012/6/21 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set
>> as
>>>> blocker
>>>>
>>>> 2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi, All
>>>>> I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1
>> release
>>>>> blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
>>>>> release blocker?
>>>>> Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from
>>>> dev
>>>>> view ?
>>>>> I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
>>>>> So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things
>> more
>>>>> clear will be very helpful.
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards.
>>>>> Lei De Bin
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards
>> Lei De Bin
>>
>>
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by De Bin Lei <le...@apache.org>.
Juergen, thank for your comments, now the criteria is more clear, thanks
again.
2012/6/21 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>
> On 6/21/12 5:51 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> > I think safety is of high value.
> >
> > That includes security issues and also data loss/corruption. The last
> includes crashers that result in unrecoverable loss of work. Hidden loss
> of work and document corruption that does not appear until the document is
> opened later is particularly serious.
> >
>
>
> We used in general the following criteria (details where we are more
> less based on can be foud under [2])
>
> - crashes (including data loss/corruption)
> - security fixes
> - regressions
>
> I would also include
> - memory leaks
> when a fix is available and it is well tested that nothing else breaks
>
>
> - maintenance issues (like updating reference type library, version
> strings, images, ...)
>
>
> A micro release like 3.4.1 is only for fixing serious problems and not
> to introduce new features. Excepting new translations.
>
> Minor releases, eg. 3.5, can include any kind of fix, features and
> improvements. Bigger UI changes should be discussed and probably better
> included in a major release.
>
> See also [1] and especially [2]
>
> We should update these pages on demand to reflect our guideline how we
> want handle this in the future. A common understanding is of course
> important here.
>
>
> Juergen
>
>
> [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria
> [2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Stopper
>
>
> > - Dennis
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dongjun zong [mailto:zongdj001@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 20:31
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
> >
> > I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related
> issue
> > should be considered as release blocker.
> >
> > 2012/6/21 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
> >
> >> From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set
> as
> >> blocker
> >>
> >> 2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
> >>
> >>> Hi, All
> >>> I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1
> release
> >>> blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
> >>> release blocker?
> >>> Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from
> >> dev
> >>> view ?
> >>> I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
> >>> So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things
> more
> >>> clear will be very helpful.
> >>> Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards.
> >>> Lei De Bin
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Best regards
> Lei De Bin
>
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On 6/21/12 5:51 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> I think safety is of high value.
>
> That includes security issues and also data loss/corruption. The last includes crashers that result in unrecoverable loss of work. Hidden loss of work and document corruption that does not appear until the document is opened later is particularly serious.
>
We used in general the following criteria (details where we are more
less based on can be foud under [2])
- crashes (including data loss/corruption)
- security fixes
- regressions
I would also include
- memory leaks
when a fix is available and it is well tested that nothing else breaks
- maintenance issues (like updating reference type library, version
strings, images, ...)
A micro release like 3.4.1 is only for fixing serious problems and not
to introduce new features. Excepting new translations.
Minor releases, eg. 3.5, can include any kind of fix, features and
improvements. Bigger UI changes should be discussed and probably better
included in a major release.
See also [1] and especially [2]
We should update these pages on demand to reflect our guideline how we
want handle this in the future. A common understanding is of course
important here.
Juergen
[1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria
[2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Stopper
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dongjun zong [mailto:zongdj001@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 20:31
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
>
> I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related issue
> should be considered as release blocker.
>
> 2012/6/21 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
>
>> From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set as
>> blocker
>>
>> 2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
>>
>>> Hi, All
>>> I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1 release
>>> blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
>>> release blocker?
>>> Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from
>> dev
>>> view ?
>>> I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
>>> So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things more
>>> clear will be very helpful.
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Best regards.
>>> Lei De Bin
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>>
>
RE: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
I think safety is of high value.
That includes security issues and also data loss/corruption. The last includes crashers that result in unrecoverable loss of work. Hidden loss of work and document corruption that does not appear until the document is opened later is particularly serious.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: dongjun zong [mailto:zongdj001@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 20:31
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related issue
should be considered as release blocker.
2012/6/21 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
> From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set as
> blocker
>
> 2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
>
> > Hi, All
> > I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1 release
> > blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
> > release blocker?
> > Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from
> dev
> > view ?
> > I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
> > So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things more
> > clear will be very helpful.
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Best regards.
> > Lei De Bin
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>
Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by dongjun zong <zo...@gmail.com>.
I think high severity regression issue, common usage function related issue
should be considered as release blocker.
2012/6/21 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
> From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set as
> blocker
>
> 2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
>
> > Hi, All
> > I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1 release
> > blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
> > release blocker?
> > Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from
> dev
> > view ?
> > I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
> > So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things more
> > clear will be very helpful.
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Best regards.
> > Lei De Bin
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>
Re: [DISCUSS]What is the criteria for 3.4.1 release blocker?
Posted by Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>.
>From my point of view, security and high usability issue should be set as
blocker
2012/6/21 debin lei <le...@apache.org>
> Hi, All
> I noticed that there are some issues, which are proposed as 3.4.1 release
> blocker recently. However, I am not sure what is the criteria for the
> release blocker?
> Is it regression or impact serious ? Or high benefit to risk ratio from dev
> view ?
> I think maybe consider more things, but not sure.
> So if you can give your criteria and discuss here to make the things more
> clear will be very helpful.
> Thanks.
>
> Best regards.
> Lei De Bin
>
--
Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji