Dne út 9. prosince 2014 Michele Calgaro napsal(a):
On 12/09/2014 02:53 AM, Slávek Banko wrote:
Three months seemed like a good time. The good
news is that builds for
armel and armhf are now significantly faster. Tim recently announced a
change in the mirror system. All this should speed up the process of
releasing a new version. The question therefore is whether we will have
enough capacity to fixing bugs. We can do this, we will assume that three
months for release 14.0.1 and in the process we'll see if that's enough
time.
Very good assessment Slavek, fully agree with you. Let's plan for 3 month
release period, but if for any reason we are not able to fix a reasonable
amount of bugs (let's say at least 20 or 30 bugs, other opinions are
welcome) in that time, we should delay until we hit such minimum
requirement.
Also, talking about v14.1.0 and v14.0.1, IMO we should slightly rearrange
the meta bugs. 1) Bug 2233 should be renamed from "v14.0.1 official bug
list (meta-bug)" to "v14.1.0 official bug list (meta-bug)" and would
contain bugs to fix in the next release / improvement suggestions 2) We
should add a new meta bug called "v14.0.1 resolved bug list". When we
resolve a bug that will go into v14.0.1, we will link that bug to the meta
bug. This meta bug will serve as a summary of all the fixes made for
v14.0.1.
Later there will be a v14.0.2, v14.0.3... meta bugs, while bug 2233 will
continue to serve as meta bug for the next minor release.
What do you think? If you agree, I can do the changes required.
Cheers
Michele
I agree that we should have a meta-bug for R14.1.0. It probably does not
matter it will renamed an existing 2233 or create a new one.
Regarding the meta-bug for R14.0.x. I would suggest for each 'patch' release
separate meta-bug. Thus, one for R14.0.1, separate for R14.0.2, and as well
as for next patch releases. It allows to plan assignment bug reports for each
patch release. A meta-bug also will then be an overview of bugs fixed in any
particular patch release.
I would suggest for patch releases not focus only on the number of fixed bugs.
Substantial could be, for example, the importance of fixed bugs. Sufficiently
frequent release of new versions also seems like a good card viability of the
project.
--
Slávek