Django 1.0 roadmap

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Jacob Kaplan-Moss

unread,
Jun 16, 2008, 11:15:38 AM6/16/08
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
Hi folks --

I've posted the final Django 1.0 roadmap, incorporating all great
feedback I got here:

http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/VersionOneRoadmap

I've also updated the features page
(http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/VersionOneFeatures) to reflect the
new list and to have a list of committers/lieutenants. If anyone wants
to volunteer to fill the "???" slots, let me know.

As requested, I've also added milestones for 1.0 alpha, beta, and
final (as well as a "post-1.0" catch-all). Triagers, feel free to use
these milestones thusly:

* Must-have feature bugs go in the "alpha" milestone. These basically
should be all nfa-blocker tickets. *Bugs* in the must-have features
are *not* to be part of this milestone; they can be fixed after the
alpha.

* Any *feature* tickets related to the maybe list get put in the beta milestone.

* Remaining *bugs* go in the 1.0 final release.

Jacob

PS: http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/20553/django/countdown.png

Karen Tracey

unread,
Jun 16, 2008, 11:40:07 AM6/16/08
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <jacob.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi folks --

I've posted the final Django 1.0 roadmap, incorporating all great
feedback I got here:

http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/VersionOneRoadmap


Cool.  One question I have regarding dates is: is there a target date for merging newforms-admin back to trunk?  There's an nfa-sprint set for July 10-12th which makes it sound like it's still on a branch at that point, but an alpha release set for the 20th...by which point I expect nfa will have to be in trunk?  So is the merge targeted for somewhere between those two dates?  Personally I think earlier would be better, even if it introduces some trunk instability.  It is the remaining big thing for 1.0, I think wider community use/feedback than it gets on a branch would be valuable as soon as possible.

Karen

Joseph Kocherhans

unread,
Jun 16, 2008, 11:49:16 AM6/16/08
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Karen Tracey <kmtr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Cool. One question I have regarding dates is: is there a target date for
> merging newforms-admin back to trunk? There's an nfa-sprint set for July
> 10-12th which makes it sound like it's still on a branch at that point, but
> an alpha release set for the 20th...by which point I expect nfa will have to
> be in trunk? So is the merge targeted for somewhere between those two
> dates? Personally I think earlier would be better, even if it introduces
> some trunk instability. It is the remaining big thing for 1.0, I think
> wider community use/feedback than it gets on a branch would be valuable as
> soon as possible.

I'd like to merge it about a week before the sprint. (Hopefully I can
free up some time soon to help make that happen.) I think that would
give the sprinters a whole lot more to do. Most of the existing nfa
stuff is non-trivial right now, but I'd imagine there will be some
easier bugs discovered once more eyeballs are on the code.

Joseph

Karen Tracey

unread,
Jun 16, 2008, 12:01:41 PM6/16/08
to django-d...@googlegroups.com

Sounds good, that'd be about 2.5 week until merge then.  I will see what I can do to help things along.  If you have any specific suggestions for ways I could help do let me know.

Thanks,
Karen

Jacob Kaplan-Moss

unread,
Jun 16, 2008, 1:10:17 PM6/16/08
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
<jacob.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As requested, I've also added milestones for 1.0 alpha, beta, and
> final (as well as a "post-1.0" catch-all). Triagers, feel free to use
> these milestones.

BTW, I've also added a batch-modify plugin to Trac so that we can
easily update lots of tickets at once. Email me privately or find me
on #django-dev if you'd like access to the feature.

Jacob

Jeff Anderson

unread,
Jun 16, 2008, 1:27:50 PM6/16/08
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> As requested, I've also added milestones for 1.0 alpha, beta, and
> final (as well as a "post-1.0" catch-all). Triagers, feel free to use
> these milestones thusly:
>
> * Must-have feature bugs go in the "alpha" milestone. These basically
> should be all nfa-blocker tickets. *Bugs* in the must-have features
> are *not* to be part of this milestone; they can be fixed after the
> alpha.
>
As I am new to the triaging process, I am seeking a clarification before
I just "go crazy" and start marking tickets for milestones:
When we say *Bugs* or "Boogs", do those include usability bugs? I did a
query on nfa-someday, thinking that they would be appropriate for the
1.0 final release milestone. There are several that address aesthetic
issues, quirks that already exist in the old admin, small usability
issues, etc... Are these types of tickets "Boogs" that should be
squished for 1.0, or are they just trivial annoyances?

Hopefully my question makes sense (it is a Monday after all)

Thanks!


Jeff Anderson

ps:
Some examples:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/7179
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/7361
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/6077

signature.asc

Marty Alchin

unread,
Jun 16, 2008, 1:43:51 PM6/16/08
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
<jacob.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As requested, I've also added milestones for 1.0 alpha, beta, and
> final (as well as a "post-1.0" catch-all). Triagers, feel free to use
> these milestones thusly:
>
> * Any *feature* tickets related to the maybe list get put in the beta milestone.

One question about this, since I'm probably best positioned to manage
the tickets related to file storage. #5361 is already added to the
beta milestone, but what should be done about the 15 other tickets
that are related to it[1]? Given how much code #5361 already has to
move, modify and replace, I've been wrapping some of the fixes up in
that one patch (keyword fs-rf-fixed), and the others will be addressed
by the documentation (keyword fs-rf-docs).

This might be considered hijacking the thread, but I can see three ways to go:

* Leave them as they are, and just tell whoever commits #5361 to
reference them in the commit message.

* Move all of the to the beta milestone, since they are indeed being
addressed, and also reference them in the comment message

* Close the fixes as duplicates now, and close the doc tickets as
wontfix once it lands (which will have to be done regardless).

Personally, I'd like to avoid the third option, since I think it's
valid to keep them going, as there's not a proper branch to checkout,
like newforms-admin has. The difference between the first two is
purely bookkeeping though, and I have no preference either way.

-Gul

[1] http://tinyurl.com/6rxpyp

Jacob Kaplan-Moss

unread,
Jun 16, 2008, 2:17:52 PM6/16/08
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Marty Alchin <gulo...@gamemusic.org> wrote:
> * Leave them as they are, and just tell whoever commits #5361 to
> reference them in the commit message.
>
> * Move all of the to the beta milestone, since they are indeed being
> addressed, and also reference them in the comment message

Do both of these, and also tag with with a common tag (see, e.g., the
qsrf-fixed or nfa-fixed tag). I'd suggest "fstorage-fixed" or
something. Actually, if you tag them first it's easy to move them all
to the milestone -- I'd like the milestones to reflect the actually
ticket count (even for dups of this nature).

Jacob

Jacob Kaplan-Moss

unread,
Jun 16, 2008, 2:19:50 PM6/16/08
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Jeff Anderson
<jeff...@programmerq.net> wrote:
> When we say *Bugs* or "Boogs", do those include usability bugs? I did a
> query on nfa-someday, thinking that they would be appropriate for the 1.0
> final release milestone. There are several that address aesthetic issues,
> quirks that already exist in the old admin, small usability issues, etc...
> Are these types of tickets "Boogs" that should be squished for 1.0, or are
> they just trivial annoyances?

It's going to be a close call either way for any of these types of
tickets. I think we'll lean towards "no" if there's not an actual bug,
but mark them in the 1.0 milestone anyway - we can always defer 'em
later on.

What we *don't* want to do is get caught trying to fix these things
before the merge; stuff like this is OK to postpone.

Jacob

Marty Alchin

unread,
Jun 16, 2008, 3:07:51 PM6/16/08
to django-d...@googlegroups.com

Tags were already done, but I've now moved them all into the beta
milestone as well. I hope I didn't overstep my boundaries here, but I
also added a note on the VersionOneRoadmap to explain the related
tickets and how the tags should be used.

-Gul

Tai Lee

unread,
Jun 17, 2008, 9:37:39 PM6/17/08
to Django developers
There are a few open tickets that I'm aware of (4412, 4604) which are
either ready for checkin or are waiting for NFA to hit trunk before
moving to ready for checkin. The work is done (patch, docs, tests).
Should these be included in the 1.0-beta or 1.0 milestone?

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages