[Cosmo-dev] Sharing work plan

[Ted Leung]

On Dec 5, 2006, at 11:52 AM, Katie Capps Parlante wrote:

> Brian Moseley wrote:
>> On 12/4/06, Ted Leung <twl at osafoundation.org> wrote:
>>> 1. Branch Cosmo 0.6 but don't release it until we have sufficient
>>> interop testing with Chandler 0.7a5 - this allows the Cosmo team to
>>> proceed with feature development for Cosmo 0.7.  The downside of  
>>> this
>>> is that we delay the appearance Casual Collaborator features.
>>> 2. Issue a Cosmo 0.6 and then issue a Cosmo 0.6.1.  This allows
>>> Casual Collaborator features to appear, and allows us to update for
>>> any changes needed for interop testing.   The downside of this is  
>>> the
>>> machinery needed to create/test/release 0.6.1 and the effort to
>>> upgrade osaf.us
>> i'd prefer option 2. i'd rather get cc features in production sooner
>> rather than later. i don't mind putting in extra effort for a
>> sharing-backend-oriented point release if necessary.
>
> I also like option 2 -- I agree with Brian that getting cc features  
> up sooner is valuable. It also gives some wiggle room if interop  
> turns out to take more time or if Chandler 0.7a5 slips its schedule  
> for some other reason.

I am fine with 2 if cosmo folks are up for it -- Randy, any comments?

>
>>> I think that it is important to have frequent and regular
>>> communication amongst all the people working on the sharing format.
>>> That would include developers for Chandler and Cosmo, as well as
>>> someone from QA.    We could do this via either a weekly e-mail
>>> "check in" thread, or a brief (i hope) weekly meeting.
>> this would be great. i don't see any reason not to keep it to email.
>
> IRC is another low-overhead option for a weekly checkin.

I'd be fine with IRC as well

Ted