SilverStripe 3.2 Beta1 - Yes this is actually happening

[Damian Mooyman]

Hi SilverStripers,

Exciting things are happening, as we've been busily attacking the last few features and fixes we wanted to finalise before we release 3.2. We plan to work on this release over the next few weeks and have a beta ready for distribution soon.

Typically our release pattern for major releases is to release one or more beta versions, with periods of about one week between each release until we are confident enough to release a release candidate. During (and prior to) this time, we would like to get as many people involved in pre-testing and developing with the code to raise bugs and finish merging any features they'd like to see included.

As this is our first major release since our decision to move to semantic versioning (see http://semver.org/), we trust that we can do justice and respect to the community by following through from here on. Once we release 3.2.0, any new features will not appear until 3.3, and we will create a new 3.2 branch to target for future bugfixes and security fixes.

Now we would like to hear from you guys on what we can do to best serve the community during this process. Please use this discussion to provide any suggestions, complaints, or questions. Also feel free to please point out any unfinished fixes or pull requests that you feel should be (but aren't currently) in the release.

We are also looking for feedback on the release timeline, and what kind of process or speed of releases is preferred.

Kind regards,

Damian Mooyman

Senior Platform Developer | SilverStripe

[Jonathon Menz]

Alright!

I submitted a PR today for the 'drop down icons always visible for folders in TreeDropdownField' bug that would be cool to see in 3.2.0 (and 3.1.x). 

As far as release timeline goes I don't mind how long it takes but it would be good to have an accurate estimate of stable release date or no estimate at all. Would be great to start building new projects with the beta but not an option if stable release date could slip by months.

Looking forward to trying out the beta!

[Thierry Francois (colymba)]

That's great news...!

In terms of PR I can only speak for mine.... there a few that have been left for dead for a bit over a year, and I think would be a great addition:

Fix UploadField iFrame transport bug and other custom validation errors that keep creeping back in...

https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework/pull/3499

Multiple HTML editor config per page

https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework/pull/2960

Better notice/warning banners. Removes those growl like pop-up that always get in the way of the tabs

https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework/pull/3178

Custom admin URL (already updating the PR...)

https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework/pull/3274

Downsampling only image config, to save valuable server space

https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework/pull/3532

If any or all of those can make it into 3.2 I can rebase and work on updating the PR asap.... :)

- Thierry

[James Cocker]

I think this is a very good candidate for a feature to be included in 3.2, as I think it just missed 3.1.

Files can be uploaded directly in the 'Insert Link' form

https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework/pull/2908

James

[James Turner]

Just a little PR from me that is worth getting into 3.2, a slight optimisation for many_many_extraFields:

https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework/pull/4108

Though I think an important bug to be fixed by 3.2 is with setting a boolean to false in a many_many_extraField. See https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework/issues/4067 for more info.

For release timeline, I could see a 0.1 releases every 6 months and a 1.0 release every 2 years. Allows new features to be added fairly often while big breaking changes aren't a yearly event (just a bi-yearly event).

[Jonathon Menz]

I've changed my thinking on release dates a bit. Have been working on a PR to add some image functions and had a lot of debate with other devs about what should be appropriate for a minor vs major release.

It was good to have the debate but it was for the wrong reasons - basically I want the PR to meet the requirements for a minor release because I want people to benefit from the changes within a reasonable timeframe, and if the changes go to master then I have no idea when it will come out.

I think the current slow pace of release and uncertain schedule creates:

1. An incentive to fight for new features to go in to the next minor release

2. Which in turn leads to arguments about SemVer

3. An incentive for core devs to delay releases to squeeze 'just this one more' feature in, because they know it could be months or years away otherwise

I confess I have no idea how much work is involved in getting a SilverStripe release out but t would be really nice if we could commit to a release schedule for major versions, of one say every 6 months. This would mean changing our expectations about what constitutes a major release. It wouldn't necessarily mean a whole bunch of revolutionary changes, sometimes it might be just a handful of patches that aren't quite backwards compatible. If devs are confident their contributions will see the light of day some time in the next 6 months then they're less likely to care if a change goes to master, and hopefully more motivated to contribute in the first place. Also when a release date comes along it should be a lot easier to say "sorry, this PR isn't quite ready so it will have to wait for the next release".

I don't think minor releases need to follow any particular schedule, if there's a cool new feature to release that doesn't break anything let's get it out as quickly as possible! We're used to apps on our phones updating themselves constantly, as soon as features are ready - and I would love to see the same approach to minor releases. I don't know what background processes go in to a minor release though so perhaps updates would need to be lumped together and follow a schedule for efficiency.

Thanks for listening ;)

[Thierry Francois (colymba)]

I agree with Jonathon, faster and shorter release cycles would be greatly welcome. Although to me 6 months for a major release is still quite long. Maybe a 4 months major release cycle would really help move things forward. There often are new features with api changes that have to wait over more than a year even though the feature is highly requested...
- Thierry

[Dieter]

Any idea/view on when 3.2 will be release ready? Any chance it will be still this year?

Op vrijdag 12 juni 2015 17:14:43 UTC+2 schreef Thierry Francois (colymba):

[Sam Minnée]

We've just pushed 3.2beta2, and we want the next release to be rc1. We're hoping for stable in 4-6 weeks but it depends on whether people find many more issues.

3.2 has been a very long time coming - it will have been 2 years since 3.1.0 in October! We're keen for 3.3 to be much quicker — maybe a few months? Part of this will be ensuring that the beta cycle can be short, which should be okay if the volume of change is smaller.

For major releases, our thinking is annually, which is a huge speed up from the current pace of roughly every 5 years! There is still a fair bit of work involved in upgrading; we don't want to force that on people every 6 months, nor do we want to maintain 4 major release lines in parallel.

In the ling term, this is always up for review, but seems reasonable for 4.0.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SilverStripe Core Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to silverstripe-d...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to silverst...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/silverstripe-dev.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Damian Mooyman]

Don't worry, it will definitely be this year. I'd like rc1 out in about 3 weeks and after that, maybe another rc or straight to stable in 2-3 weeks again.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "SilverStripe Core Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/silverstripe-dev/8Y5xNSAEUfA/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to silverstripe-d...@googlegroups.com.