[sakai2-tcc] Cleaning up versions in Jira

[Noah Botimer]

I think we should get rid of the non-versions, in JIRA and in practice. I know that requires resources and has implications on the interpretation of QA of releases, but it is a general disservice to have so many installations nowhere close to a released version.

I think we have excused ourselves from making enough releases on the basis that the fortunate ones can just run (effectively) nightlies [so what's the problem?] and that releases are too difficult. I don't think this logic is consistent. We don't run releases because we don't make them and we don't make releases because we don't use them. And they're hard anyway, and they would imply a certain level of QA that may or may not have been present, so just run .x, which has all the fat and none of the flavor.

If we make creating releases easier, we will do them and use them (even as a starting point for modifications). It is no more or less a mandate to update or guarantee than we have now, nor is it any more work to use (svn sw instead of svn up) -- just more milestones on the .x branch (and a few more GB on disk in the archive).

Basically, this is my typical +1 with a call to action diversion.

Thanks,
-Noah

On Jul 6, 2011, at 10:51 AM, David Horwitz wrote:

> Aha - I think we're in agreement but possibly talking cross purposes - that is exactly my reason for wanting to get rid of the .x non-versions :-)
> 
> D
> 
> On 07/06/2011 04:44 PM, Matthew Jones wrote:
>> 
>> I mean on Jira, if you put in an affects version of 2.7.x it is useless because it could be 2.7.x svn revision 69630 where there was a problem or svn revision 93259. The branch itself like trunk is meaningless without the revision number attached, but has meaning with the revision, especially since we don't tag many releases. It's possible if someone is on an older '.x' that it could be fixed in a newer '.x'. At least for the tag, the revision is fixed.
>> 
>> -Matthew
>> 
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:36 AM, David Horwitz <david.horwitz at uct.ac.za> wrote:
>> Hi Matt,
>> 
>> 
>> On 07/06/2011 04:26 PM, Matthew Jones wrote:
>>> 
>>> Where was this discussed at? While I'll agree the .x and trunk pretty alone useless as an affects or fixed, I can see both being useful if there was a version number attached to it.
>>> 
>> 
>> I raised this at the project planing meeting. What do you mean by "if there was a version number attached to it". There is always the the version for the next release of a branch (indicated by the [Tentative]) and listed in Jira in the "Unreleased" heading.
>> 
>> 
>>> I think I'd still leave the latest 2.5 as a version, as people are still running that and people are still fixing it. However I'd *guess* that most are on 2.5.x, but that wouldn't be selectable right?
>>> 
>> 2.5.7 and 2.5.x have been archived for some time - I'm not aware of any branch merges that have been done since Steve Swinsberg did the last official round. It seems to me that most schools that are on 2.5 are working on migrating (based on what I've seen on list but are could be wrong). 
>> 
>> 
>> D
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:34 AM, David Horwitz <david.horwitz at uct.ac.za> wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> 
>>> As discussed in LA we suggested getting rid of the x versions, so unless
>>> I hear otherwise I will archive the following versions:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> - 2.6.x
>>> -2.7.x
>>> -2.8.x
>>> 
>>> Archiving means that issues that where tagged as affecting or fixed in
>>> those versions will still display this, however those versions will no
>>> longer appear in the dropdowns.
>>> 
>>> I would also suggest we archive the 2.5 versions:
>>> 2.5.0
>>> 2.5.1
>>> 2.5.2
>>> 2.5.3
>>> 2.5.4
>>> 2.5.5
>>> 2.5.6
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Any objections?
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>> David
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sakai2-tcc mailing list
>>> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
>>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
>>> 
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai2-tcc/attachments/20110706/ee0f5034/attachment.html