You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org by Angela Schreiber <an...@adobe.com> on 2014/10/08 14:05:08 UTC
Jira: Oak Fix Versions
Hi Devs
I am bit confused with the set of fix versions that we currently
have defined in our Oak Jira.
What we currently have is:
- 1.0
- 1.0.x for releases of the 1.0 branch
- 1.1.0 for the 1.1.0 release
- 1.1.1
- 2.0
What I am actually missing is 1.2.0 for everything that should
go into the next stable release.
In Jackrabbit we used to have:
- fix versions for stable releases with even number (2.0, ... , 2.8)
and their minor bugfixing releases from the branch
- fix versions for 'instable' releases from the trunk (e.g. 2.9)
- major version changes: e.g. 1.x compared to 2.x when we moved from
JCR 1.0 to JCR 2.0
Is the 1.2 version just missing?
And why are all open issues scheduled for 1.1.1? this is IMO not very
realistic and i would prefer to have them scheduled for the next stable
release instead of moving them every time we do an instable release from
the trunk.
What is 2.0 for? Do we already have plans for a major release with
major changes? If yes I somehow missed that...
Regards
Angela
Re: Jira: Oak Fix Versions
Posted by Angela Schreiber <an...@adobe.com>.
Thanks a lot!
On 08/10/14 14:36, "Marcel Reutegger" <mr...@adobe.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 08/10/14 14:20, "Marcel Reutegger" <mr...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>because we don't have a 1.2 version ;)
>>
>>I'll create one in JIRA and update unresolved issues.
>
>Done. Please change the fix version back to 1.1.x when you
>resolve an issue currently scheduled for 1.2. Also feel free
>to set it back to 1.1.1 when you intend to fix an issue for
>the next unstable release.
>
>Regards
> Marcel
>
Re: Jira: Oak Fix Versions
Posted by Marcel Reutegger <mr...@adobe.com>.
Hi,
On 13/10/14 12:55, "Davide Giannella" <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>Question for clarifying some doubts I have.
>
>Everything in trunk will be 1.2 (next stable release) and when we cut an
>unstable one we use 1.1.x. Is that right?
Yes.
The idea of the 1.2 fix version is to indicate what issues we intend
to fix or implement until the 1.2 release.
>Now should we leave multiple versions on the issue? For example we have
>create an issue in trunk for the next iteration and it will be 1.2. We
>resolve it and release it in the unstable cut: let's say 1.1.1. Now the
>issue is resolve 1.2, 1.1.1. We then backport it to the current stable
>as it was a bug and we therefore have resolve: 1.2, 1.1.1, 1.0.9. When
>we'll cut the next new stable the versions will be 1.2.0, 1.1.1, 1.0.9.
>Is this correct?
I wouldn't keep the 1.2 fix version when we release an unstable 1.1.x with
resolved issues.
Regards
Marcel
>
>Thank you
>Davide
>
>
Re: Jira: Oak Fix Versions
Posted by Davide Giannella <da...@apache.org>.
On 08/10/2014 13:36, Marcel Reutegger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 08/10/14 14:20, "Marcel Reutegger" <mr...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> because we don't have a 1.2 version ;)
>>
>> I'll create one in JIRA and update unresolved issues.
> Done. Please change the fix version back to 1.1.x when you
> resolve an issue currently scheduled for 1.2. Also feel free
> to set it back to 1.1.1 when you intend to fix an issue for
> the next unstable release.
>
Question for clarifying some doubts I have.
Everything in trunk will be 1.2 (next stable release) and when we cut an
unstable one we use 1.1.x. Is that right?
Now should we leave multiple versions on the issue? For example we have
create an issue in trunk for the next iteration and it will be 1.2. We
resolve it and release it in the unstable cut: let's say 1.1.1. Now the
issue is resolve 1.2, 1.1.1. We then backport it to the current stable
as it was a bug and we therefore have resolve: 1.2, 1.1.1, 1.0.9. When
we'll cut the next new stable the versions will be 1.2.0, 1.1.1, 1.0.9.
Is this correct?
Thank you
Davide
Re: Jira: Oak Fix Versions
Posted by Marcel Reutegger <mr...@adobe.com>.
Hi,
On 08/10/14 14:20, "Marcel Reutegger" <mr...@adobe.com> wrote:
>because we don't have a 1.2 version ;)
>
>I'll create one in JIRA and update unresolved issues.
Done. Please change the fix version back to 1.1.x when you
resolve an issue currently scheduled for 1.2. Also feel free
to set it back to 1.1.1 when you intend to fix an issue for
the next unstable release.
Regards
Marcel
Re: Jira: Oak Fix Versions
Posted by Julian Reschke <ju...@gmx.de>.
On 2014-10-08 14:20, Marcel Reutegger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 08/10/14 14:05, "Angela Schreiber" <an...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> Is the 1.2 version just missing?
>
> It is missing and I agree with should have one to indicate what we
> want to implement for the upcoming stable release.
>
>> And why are all open issues scheduled for 1.1.1?
>
> because we don't have a 1.2 version ;)
>
> I'll create one in JIRA and update unresolved issues.
>
> Regards
> Marcel
+1
Re: Jira: Oak Fix Versions
Posted by Marcel Reutegger <mr...@adobe.com>.
Hi,
On 08/10/14 14:05, "Angela Schreiber" <an...@adobe.com> wrote:
>Is the 1.2 version just missing?
It is missing and I agree with should have one to indicate what we
want to implement for the upcoming stable release.
>And why are all open issues scheduled for 1.1.1?
because we don't have a 1.2 version ;)
I'll create one in JIRA and update unresolved issues.
Regards
Marcel
Re: Jira: Oak Fix Versions
Posted by Michael Dürig <md...@apache.org>.
AFAIR we added 2.0 before the 1.0 release as a bucket for everything not
going into 1.0 without thinking to much about it. Now that we adapted
the stable/unstable scheme we should probably clean this up:
- create an 1.2 version and schedule issues either against 1.2 or 1.1.1.
- remove 2.0 and un/re-schedule everything currently set for 2.0.
Michael
On 8.10.14 2:05 , Angela Schreiber wrote:
> Hi Devs
>
> I am bit confused with the set of fix versions that we currently
> have defined in our Oak Jira.
>
> What we currently have is:
>
> - 1.0
> - 1.0.x for releases of the 1.0 branch
> - 1.1.0 for the 1.1.0 release
> - 1.1.1
> - 2.0
>
> What I am actually missing is 1.2.0 for everything that should
> go into the next stable release.
>
> In Jackrabbit we used to have:
>
> - fix versions for stable releases with even number (2.0, ... , 2.8)
> and their minor bugfixing releases from the branch
> - fix versions for 'instable' releases from the trunk (e.g. 2.9)
> - major version changes: e.g. 1.x compared to 2.x when we moved from
> JCR 1.0 to JCR 2.0
>
> Is the 1.2 version just missing?
>
> And why are all open issues scheduled for 1.1.1? this is IMO not very
> realistic and i would prefer to have them scheduled for the next stable
> release instead of moving them every time we do an instable release from
> the trunk.
>
> What is 2.0 for? Do we already have plans for a major release with
> major changes? If yes I somehow missed that...
>
> Regards
> Angela
>