[Cosmo-dev] Cosmo 0.7.1 release plan

[Katie Capps Parlante]

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 
Error

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.

Cheers,
Katie

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?
> 
> Cheers,
> Katie
> 
> 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
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmo-dev