Re: [VOTE] Release Tuscany SCA 2.0 RC1

[ant elder <an...@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 9:57 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ok well thanks for looking. I think we all knew there were issues with
>> some samples, and we saw what happened with the beta1 release when we
>> tried to sort all that out and it descended into unconstructiveness. I
>> can fix some of those that you've pointed out, though i wont have much
>> time for a little while, but there are some i'm not interested in. I'd
>> have preferred to just release what we have quickly and fix things
>> incrementally in more frequent releases but for now i'll wait a little
>> while and see if we get any fixes made and then look at an RC2 in a
>> week or two.
>>
>>   ...ant
>>
>
> Ok, well for a 2.0 release I think we should either fix or remove
> stuff that doesn't work. I'll have some time but it's a bit sporadic
> at the moment.
>

Ok I'll look forward to you sporadic help. I will point out that we
tried the approach you suggest with Beta2 and had a 100+ email grumpy
thread when people didn't like samples getting taken out. With the
help we have IMHO its better to get a release out soon than sit on it
for months or years as its not perfect and this is the approach I'm
going to take with the next RCs.

   ...ant

Re: [VOTE] Release Tuscany SCA 2.0 RC1

[ant elder <an...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Simon Nash <na...@apache.org> wrote:
> ant elder wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 9:57 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ok well thanks for looking. I think we all knew there were issues with
>>>> some samples, and we saw what happened with the beta1 release when we
>>>> tried to sort all that out and it descended into unconstructiveness. I
>>>> can fix some of those that you've pointed out, though i wont have much
>>>> time for a little while, but there are some i'm not interested in. I'd
>>>> have preferred to just release what we have quickly and fix things
>>>> incrementally in more frequent releases but for now i'll wait a little
>>>> while and see if we get any fixes made and then look at an RC2 in a
>>>> week or two.
>>>>
>>>>  ...ant
>>>>
>>> Ok, well for a 2.0 release I think we should either fix or remove
>>> stuff that doesn't work. I'll have some time but it's a bit sporadic
>>> at the moment.
>>>
>>
>> Ok I'll look forward to you sporadic help. I will point out that we
>> tried the approach you suggest with Beta2 and had a 100+ email grumpy
>> thread when people didn't like samples getting taken out. With the
>> help we have IMHO its better to get a release out soon than sit on it
>> for months or years as its not perfect and this is the approach I'm
>> going to take with the next RCs.
>>
>>   ...ant
>>
>>
> IIRC, there was agreement on that thread that samples that don't work
> should be taken out, but there were objections to removing samples that
> do work.
>
>  Simon
>

Hi Simon,

I don't think there was ever real agreement with everyone on doing
that, and before that there was "agreement" to move all the samples
out and only move them back when working but it turned out that people
didn't express their disagreement till after that worked actually
started, and in either case I don't think there was ever real
agreement on what "working" actually meant.

What ever might have been agreed in the past I'm not sure that moving
something that isn't perfect out now would actually help speed up
getting the release out because when it actually comes down to it if
someone finds their favorite sample isn't in an RC that they're
reviewing it usually means they want a respin to put it back in. I
think we'll just need to fix up enough to get three people happy
enough to vote and what the work entails is going to depend on who
those three voters are and as we don't have three yet i guess this is
going to drag on.

   ...ant

Re: [VOTE] Release Tuscany SCA 2.0 RC1

[Simon Nash <na...@apache.org>]

ant elder wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 9:57 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ok well thanks for looking. I think we all knew there were issues with
>>> some samples, and we saw what happened with the beta1 release when we
>>> tried to sort all that out and it descended into unconstructiveness. I
>>> can fix some of those that you've pointed out, though i wont have much
>>> time for a little while, but there are some i'm not interested in. I'd
>>> have preferred to just release what we have quickly and fix things
>>> incrementally in more frequent releases but for now i'll wait a little
>>> while and see if we get any fixes made and then look at an RC2 in a
>>> week or two.
>>>
>>>   ...ant
>>>
>> Ok, well for a 2.0 release I think we should either fix or remove
>> stuff that doesn't work. I'll have some time but it's a bit sporadic
>> at the moment.
>>
> 
> Ok I'll look forward to you sporadic help. I will point out that we
> tried the approach you suggest with Beta2 and had a 100+ email grumpy
> thread when people didn't like samples getting taken out. With the
> help we have IMHO its better to get a release out soon than sit on it
> for months or years as its not perfect and this is the approach I'm
> going to take with the next RCs.
> 
>    ...ant
> 
> 
IIRC, there was agreement on that thread that samples that don't work
should be taken out, but there were objections to removing samples that
do work.

   Simon