[izpack-dev] 5.0 and later - roadmap?
55 views
Skip to first unread message
René Krell
Aug 21, 2012, 9:14:03 AM8/21/12
to d...@izpack.codehaus.org
Hi all,
currently just for discussion:
It is probably early to imagine a release date for 5.0, but it has
been already a fairly long time ago 5.0.0-beta10 has been released.
Regarding the reports we get from older releases it might be
convenient to release a 5.0.0-beta11 to get a broader base of users
testing it. What do you think about it? As you know, there have been
many things moved on since beta10.
From my point of view, it is still too early to create a 5.0.0 release
candidate, unless there are not squashed, closed or postponed some
existing bugs.
We should also create some later versions at least in Jira, for
example 5.0.1, 5.1 and 6.0, to decide where to get minor issues,
feature requests, ideas, wishes and so on, which can't be done now or
in the next few weeks.
As mentioned above, I would like to to the following in the next days:
- release 5.0.0-beta11
Of course after all active developers gave "green light" to include
there current work.
- create the subsequent versions 5.0.1, 5.1, 6.0 in Jira
Maybe it will be enough to file issues for 5.0.1 to 5.0 and not to
create minor versions in Jira, not sure about the best way with this.
After this I would go ahead to a RC in the next weeks or months, but
this should be already stable in most environments, and create a
stable branch for 5.0, opening the code for further refactoring and
enhancements.
What do you think about it? Do you think we can already count with
certain release dates or cycles?
Will we get off the ground with 5.0 until christmas this year or even
earlier? ;-)
René
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
currently just for discussion:
It is probably early to imagine a release date for 5.0, but it has
been already a fairly long time ago 5.0.0-beta10 has been released.
Regarding the reports we get from older releases it might be
convenient to release a 5.0.0-beta11 to get a broader base of users
testing it. What do you think about it? As you know, there have been
many things moved on since beta10.
From my point of view, it is still too early to create a 5.0.0 release
candidate, unless there are not squashed, closed or postponed some
existing bugs.
We should also create some later versions at least in Jira, for
example 5.0.1, 5.1 and 6.0, to decide where to get minor issues,
feature requests, ideas, wishes and so on, which can't be done now or
in the next few weeks.
As mentioned above, I would like to to the following in the next days:
- release 5.0.0-beta11
Of course after all active developers gave "green light" to include
there current work.
- create the subsequent versions 5.0.1, 5.1, 6.0 in Jira
Maybe it will be enough to file issues for 5.0.1 to 5.0 and not to
create minor versions in Jira, not sure about the best way with this.
After this I would go ahead to a RC in the next weeks or months, but
this should be already stable in most environments, and create a
stable branch for 5.0, opening the code for further refactoring and
enhancements.
What do you think about it? Do you think we can already count with
certain release dates or cycles?
Will we get off the ground with 5.0 until christmas this year or even
earlier? ;-)
René
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
Tim Anderson
Aug 21, 2012, 7:36:01 PM8/21/12
to d...@izpack.codehaus.org
For the record, here are the
outstanding issues flagged for 5.0:
http://tinyurl.com/izpack-5-0
I'd like to complete IZPACK-837 and IZPACK-851, but am happy with releasing beta11 after that.
I imagine many of the new features can be moved out to 6.0, and improvements moved either to a 5.1 or 6.0 release.
-Tim
http://tinyurl.com/izpack-5-0
I'd like to complete IZPACK-837 and IZPACK-851, but am happy with releasing beta11 after that.
I imagine many of the new features can be moved out to 6.0, and improvements moved either to a 5.1 or 6.0 release.
-Tim
Dan Tran
Aug 21, 2012, 9:32:20 PM8/21/12
to d...@izpack.codehaus.org
I would recommend to move forward to 5.0 quickly, this is how you get
user involve and get needed feedback.
-D
user involve and get needed feedback.
-D
René Krell
Aug 23, 2012, 2:41:13 AM8/23/12
to d...@izpack.codehaus.org
I'd still not release it for several cleanup and design reasons. After
this long time there should be some action, especially in honor of the
active developers, contributors and testing users, who did a good job
since introducing IzPack 5. Maybe a RC in the next few weeks would be
a good compromise.
From experience, the *.0 versions are not the most stable ones :-)
Nevertheless, there are still some known bugs to be resolved, which
are relevant. If I'll find some more time, I'll post a complete list
of particular issues which I wouldn't postpone a solution for. I've
not found the time to look through them all.
Secondly the functionality and descriptor syntax and semantics must be
frozen, IMHO. There are still discussions around the
ConfigurationInstallerListener, for example, which are worth to bring
to a good end.
The documentation is already in a quite good state, some points are
missing, but it is already usable for most purposes.
Please everyone point out, what you'd like to get in the next release
of 5.0.0. Tim already mentioned the issues IZPACK-837 and IZPACK-851,
I'd still test whether IZPACK-835 and IZPACK-769 are still relevant,
and finish the ConfigurationInstallerListener design. There are much
more open issues, which I'd call important from their title.
René
2012/8/22 Dan Tran <dan...@gmail.com>:
this long time there should be some action, especially in honor of the
active developers, contributors and testing users, who did a good job
since introducing IzPack 5. Maybe a RC in the next few weeks would be
a good compromise.
From experience, the *.0 versions are not the most stable ones :-)
Nevertheless, there are still some known bugs to be resolved, which
are relevant. If I'll find some more time, I'll post a complete list
of particular issues which I wouldn't postpone a solution for. I've
not found the time to look through them all.
Secondly the functionality and descriptor syntax and semantics must be
frozen, IMHO. There are still discussions around the
ConfigurationInstallerListener, for example, which are worth to bring
to a good end.
The documentation is already in a quite good state, some points are
missing, but it is already usable for most purposes.
Please everyone point out, what you'd like to get in the next release
of 5.0.0. Tim already mentioned the issues IZPACK-837 and IZPACK-851,
I'd still test whether IZPACK-835 and IZPACK-769 are still relevant,
and finish the ConfigurationInstallerListener design. There are much
more open issues, which I'd call important from their title.
René
2012/8/22 Dan Tran <dan...@gmail.com>:
René Krell
Aug 28, 2012, 2:22:09 AM8/28/12
to d...@izpack.codehaus.org
Just FYI: I've added the versions 5.1 and 6.0 to JIRA, we can start
moving several issues to future versions, although there doesn't
currently exist any guideline, what may change in them. I would bind
versioning to the user interfaces and installation descriptor schemas.
One approach could be using 5.1 for enhancements, not breaking
existing installers, and 6.0 for redesign purposes, which might do so.
Not sure, whether this is the best approach.
2012/8/23 René Krell <renda...@gmail.com>:
moving several issues to future versions, although there doesn't
currently exist any guideline, what may change in them. I would bind
versioning to the user interfaces and installation descriptor schemas.
One approach could be using 5.1 for enhancements, not breaking
existing installers, and 6.0 for redesign purposes, which might do so.
Not sure, whether this is the best approach.
2012/8/23 René Krell <renda...@gmail.com>:
René Krell
Dec 12, 2012, 9:43:40 AM12/12/12
to dev
Hi all,
after the discussion here and a recent agreement with Tim I'd like to release the 5.0.0-beta11 for testing and reporting, which should be the last beta before making a cut by switching to a RC or the 5.0.0 final release. Testing snapshots might be difficult in several environments, thus, having another beta release after such a long time might be convenient for more users.
Although there has been done much work since 5.0.0-beta10, there are still some open issues. We will decide later, what to do with them.
Any more opinions?
René
2012/8/28 René Krell <renda...@gmail.com>
Julien Ponge
Dec 12, 2012, 10:48:22 AM12/12/12
to d...@izpack.codehaus.org
I'm super happy that Tim and you are pushing the project forward :-)
Looking forward to seeing the first release by the new maintainers!
- Julien
Looking forward to seeing the first release by the new maintainers!
- Julien
Dan Tran
Dec 12, 2012, 11:17:33 AM12/12/12
to d...@izpack.codehaus.org
+1
Huge thanks for pushing this toward 5.0
-D
Huge thanks for pushing this toward 5.0
-D
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages