for what my opinion matters, I'm in favor of the bi-weekly schedule.
On 3/19/07, Jesse McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ok, I am changing my tune on the remaining 11 issues, I want this thing released asap so we have something concrete to get moving on. The 11 issues are functionally no real different then a lot of the ones in the -2 jira so I am thinking we just push that forward and get going on this. so, I haven't actually pulled a release on something like this at apache, from what I understand we can put this someplace for downloading that doesn't have to get mirrored all over the place. more information please brett... Should we vote on this? I think we have an implict consent based on just this thread from committers but should this alpha cycle take a vote each push, or can we vote on a biweekly release schedule for alphas for the next month or two? if we get this decided I'll arrange the dependencies and get this thing alpha release dealio running asap. jesse On 3/15/07, Jesse McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > yes, you are also correct on that, great point > > On 3/15/07, Thierry Lach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Of the unresolved issues for 1.1-alpha-any, 108 of them are against some > > version of continuum 1.0 and might not apply to continuum-1.1, but someone > > is going to have to verify that. > > > > On 3/13/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 12/03/2007, at 7:35 AM, Jesse McConnell wrote: > > > > > > On 13/03/2007, at 10:31 AM, Carlos Sanchez wrote: > > > > These are the numbers I see in jira right now > > > > 1.1-alpha-1 11 > > > > 1.1-alpha-2 72 > > > > 1.1-alpha-# 156 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > jesse mcconnell > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- jesse mcconnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
