[Cosmo-dev] Cosmo 0.7.1 release plan
Katie Capps Parlante
capps at osafoundation.org
Wed Sep 5 10:05:53 PDT 2007
I moved 2 more bugs from 0.7.future --> 0.7.1:
Bug 10727: daily recurring event display problems
Bug 10692: sharing alarms on a published collection throws a 500 Server
Undisciplined on my part -- not going to just do that unilaterally again
(unless we agree to that process for some reason).
I assume the process should be to untarget to "---" for nomination and
process through bug council.
Katie Capps Parlante wrote:
> Ok, bugs are marked.
> - For non-safari bugs, two bugs are "critical", one is marked as "major"
> - For safari bugs, four "critical" and one "major" (once we fix these we
> can say we support Safari). Ted, you mentioned using severity as the
> order for fixing the bugs. If we don't want to prioritize Safari support
> for 0.7.1 or .2 its ok to not prioritize these as highly as other
> "critical" bugs. I am perfectly comfortable prioritizing them highly,
> however, as I wouldn't want to let Safari support linger for too long.
> If we see users bump into other bugs on the list, we may upgrade the
> severity. Note that I didn't mark any as "blocking" -- I reserved that
> for truly blocking bugs that we may yet run into.
> A few of these bugs were pulled in from "Future" bugs (Mimi scanned all
> of the bugs). A few of the bugs I haven't marked yet because they are
> essentially a feature enhancement and require some discussion.
> I think of this as the baseline set of most important bugs for the
> series of 0.7.x releases. I don't think it is super important to quibble
> about the order in which they get fixed (at least not from a PPD
> perspective). That means developers have some room to be efficient --
> fix a group in the same place in the code, go for the simpler bugs
> first, etc.
> I understand that we won't get many (even most) of these fixes in 0.7.1
> -- we can roll the remaining ones to 0.7.2 (and follow a similar process
> for 0.7.3, etc.) That is fine -- I'm more concerned with momentum and
> progress than particular fixes with only the very few exceptions.
> If any of the 0.7.1 bugs require schema changes, library upgrades, or
> other investments we don't want to tackle in the first versions (or in
> 0.7.x at all), we can punt them out. Perhaps retarget as '---' to bring
> them up for discussion?
> Ted Leung wrote:
>> - Katie will move the bugs from 0.7.future to 0.7.1 and set the
>> severity flags to reflect PPD priority for those bugs. Please work
>> on bugs in severity order. If all bugs have the same severity, then
>> you are free to work on whichever bugs you deem most important. I
>> hope to actually use the priority fields on bugs to help disambiguate
>> these cases, but for now, the highest severity bugs should get
>> priority. In the meantime please swag any unswagged 0.7.future bugs.
> cosmo-dev mailing list
> cosmo-dev at lists.osafoundation.org
More information about the cosmo-dev