[cle-release-team] [sakai2-tcc] Emerging consensus to focus on 2.10

[Jean-Francois Leveque]

Hi Neal,

Here's what I wrote at the end of the etherpad for yesterday's meeting I 
wasn't able to attend:

In order for 2.9.4 to be released, we need merges, QA and release work. 
Did I forget something?

     Do we still have QA volunteers for 2.9.4?

     Do we still have 2.9.x maintenance merge volunteers?

     Do we have a release building volunteer and if we don't, how much 
work is it (learning and doing)?

I need to know if we're gonna release 2.9.4 because it seems a 
significant chunk of the community is using releases only and it seems 
to me this is the institutions which don't have much staff assigned to 
Sakai or have joined the community recently. It also seems those 
institutions have a larger non-English Sakai deployment ratio that the 
global community.

Because I have to care for i18n/L10n, I feel I have to care for getting 
maintenance releases out. However, I'm afraid I can't do all the work. 
Maybe, if others don't volunteer to help 2.9.4 out, I should try to get 
mostly i18n/L10n maintenance releases out. What do you think?

Cheers,

J-F

On 05/09/2013 17:21, Neal Caidin wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Summary
> -----------------
> There appears to be an emerging consensus to shift the development focus
> to 2.10. If you have concerns about this please speak up.
>
>
>
> Supporting evidence
> ----------------------------------------
> This consensus is based on :
>
> * The TCC discussion at Open Apereo 2013 (under future release cycles) -
> https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/TCC/2013+Apereo+TCC+Meeting+Notes
>
>
> * The email discussion thread -
> http://sakai-project-mail-list-archives.1343168.n2.nabble.com/sakai2-tcc-CLE-2-9-4-vs-CLE-2-10-effort-tt7591837.html
>
> * Today's CLE release team meeting with approximately 13-14 attending,
> for which there was consensus to focus on the 2.10 release
>
>
> Additional thoughts
> -----------------------------------
> It seems to me that there are still some open questions with 2.10, but
> nothing that would prevent us from shifting development/qa focus onto
> it. In my mind we still need to flesh out the goals for 2.10, work on a
> realistic timeline, and perhaps, most difficult of all, decide on a name
> ! :-)
>
> 2.9 will continue to be supported as the production release, of course,
> and we might want some further discussion on the best way to manage the
> 2.9.x branch and/or community expectations (e.g. keep track of 2.9.x
> changes post-2.9.3 ; possibly create a 2.9.4 tag at some point [though
> there was not a lot of enthusiasm on today's CLE call for that
> strategy], etc.).
>
>
>
> If I have misstated anything, please feel free to correct me.
>
> Thanks!
> Neal
>
>
>
> Neal Caidin
> Sakai CLE Community Coordinator
> neal.caidin at apereo.org <mailto:neal.caidin at apereo.org>
> Skype: nealkdin
> Twitter: ncaidin