You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@bloodhound.apache.org by Ryan J Ollos <rj...@apache.org> on 2015/01/24 21:24:14 UTC
Bloodhound Release 9
So that we have a goal to work towards, Release 9 has been created with a
moderate number (currently 10) of tickets, and the goal of releasing on 01
March.
Most of the tickets fit the following criteria:
1. High priority issues reported by the community (#813, #840, #845, #846)
2. In-progress tickets that were not complete for Release 8 (#695)
3. Minor cosmetic issues that should be easy to fix (#634, #842)
I hope devs will feel free to pick up and work any of these tickets, as
well as target any other important issues to the milestone. It will be good
to keep the scope of the milestone fairly small though, so that we can
achieve the goal of releasing on March 1.
- Ryan
Re: Bloodhound Release 9
Posted by Ryan J Ollos <rj...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Ryan J Ollos <rj...@apache.org> wrote:
> So that we have a goal to work towards, Release 9 has been created with a
> moderate number (currently 10) of tickets, and the goal of releasing on 01
> March.
>
> Most of the tickets fit the following criteria:
> 1. High priority issues reported by the community (#813, #840, #845, #846)
> 2. In-progress tickets that were not complete for Release 8 (#695)
> 3. Minor cosmetic issues that should be easy to fix (#634, #842)
>
> I hope devs will feel free to pick up and work any of these tickets, as
> well as target any other important issues to the milestone. It will be good
> to keep the scope of the milestone fairly small though, so that we can
> achieve the goal of releasing on March 1.
>
> - Ryan
>
Link for Milestone "Release 9":
https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/milestone/Release%209
Re: Bloodhound Release 9
Posted by Ryan J Ollos <rj...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Olemis Lang <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/24/15, Ryan J Ollos <rj...@apache.org> wrote:
> > So that we have a goal to work towards, Release 9 has been created with a
> > moderate number (currently 10) of tickets, and the goal of releasing on
> 01
> > March.
> >
>
> Nice !
>
> > Most of the tickets fit the following criteria:
> > 1. High priority issues reported by the community (#813, #840, #845,
> #846)
>
> Would be nice to fix these , yes
>
> > 2. In-progress tickets that were not complete for Release 8 (#695)
>
> I could test this , though test cases have been proposed afaicr ...
>
> > 3. Minor cosmetic issues that should be easy to fix (#634, #842)
> >
>
> ... and try to take a look into these as well .
>
> > I hope devs will feel free to pick up and work any of these tickets,
>
> I'll try to follow your call on this subject . Nonetheless considering
> the *apparent* synchronization of Trac + BH releases , would it be
> worthy to upgrade the version of Trac distributed with BH and keep
> them in sync ?
>
I think it is a worthy aim to continually pull Trac releases to Bloodhound.
Before I retargetted tickets in the milestones, "Release 9" was full on
tickets that are needed to integrate Trac 1.0.2 into Bloodhound. However,
the list of tickets is not complete for 1.0.2 as I lost track of it after a
while, and doesn't included any of the tickets needed for Trac 1.0.3
integration. The tickets for Trac 1.0.2 were moved to Release 10, and
currently number 30.
https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/query?status=!closed&keywords=~trac-1.0.2
Trac maintains a stable API, but the Trac codebase has been hacked-up to
make multi-product work, and the templates replaced as well, so the merge
and integration is not trivial.
That leaves me feeling that it's too much work to deal with the 30+ ticket
needed for integration, and we are better off focusing in the short term on
putting out a release with some critical fixes. If that happens, and we
have some momentum, then we may be in a better position to look at
integrating Trac 1.0.2 and 1.0.3. By that time there will have been at
least one more Trac release, probably two releases since I introduced a
regression in 1.0.3 that warrants immediate release of 1.0.4.
>
> > as
> > well as target any other important issues to the milestone.
>
>
> > It will be good
> > to keep the scope of the milestone fairly small though, so that we can
> > achieve the goal of releasing on March 1.
> >
>
> yes , I do think that contributors will be much more motivated if the
> project releases early and is constantly moving towards next milestone
> .
>
> Nevertheless scheduling for April (i.e. one month after Trac's) might
> help with testing BH core after merging latest Trac release , in case
> that's something worth doing for Release 9 . We could also merge Trac
> core twice a year (i.e. six month time window)
>
> p.s. I'm planning to attend PyCon this year too so I'm also hoping to
> meet you (and others interested on Trac + BH development) there during
> sprints .
>
I'll be at PyCon, but may only be able to stay for one-half day of the
sprints. I do hope to make it to the two pre-conference days of training
though. I'll be looking forward to meeting up with you again, and hope we
can generate interest from others, even if just for a meeting and
discussion.
Re: Bloodhound Release 9
Posted by Olemis Lang <ol...@gmail.com>.
On 1/24/15, Ryan J Ollos <rj...@apache.org> wrote:
> So that we have a goal to work towards, Release 9 has been created with a
> moderate number (currently 10) of tickets, and the goal of releasing on 01
> March.
>
Nice !
> Most of the tickets fit the following criteria:
> 1. High priority issues reported by the community (#813, #840, #845, #846)
Would be nice to fix these , yes
> 2. In-progress tickets that were not complete for Release 8 (#695)
I could test this , though test cases have been proposed afaicr ...
> 3. Minor cosmetic issues that should be easy to fix (#634, #842)
>
... and try to take a look into these as well .
> I hope devs will feel free to pick up and work any of these tickets,
I'll try to follow your call on this subject . Nonetheless considering
the *apparent* synchronization of Trac + BH releases , would it be
worthy to upgrade the version of Trac distributed with BH and keep
them in sync ?
> as
> well as target any other important issues to the milestone.
> It will be good
> to keep the scope of the milestone fairly small though, so that we can
> achieve the goal of releasing on March 1.
>
yes , I do think that contributors will be much more motivated if the
project releases early and is constantly moving towards next milestone
.
Nevertheless scheduling for April (i.e. one month after Trac's) might
help with testing BH core after merging latest Trac release , in case
that's something worth doing for Release 9 . We could also merge Trac
core twice a year (i.e. six month time window)
p.s. I'm planning to attend PyCon this year too so I'm also hoping to
meet you (and others interested on Trac + BH development) there during
sprints .
--
Regards,
Olemis - @olemislc
Apache(tm) Bloodhound contributor
http://issues.apache.org/bloodhound
http://blood-hound.net
Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/
Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/
Featured article: