The second Bug-Fixing Weekend again showed how much work can be done, when a bunch of people get together. There were about 20 users online in the Skype chat: Part of them fixing bugs and the other part finding new.
Consequently the total number of bugs didn't really go down: We started with 65 bugs and 20 patches. After a brief evaluation some of them were moved to .81 or .9 and we started fixing the rest.
Saturday afternoon we still had the number of 65 bugs - because the testers were as busy as the programmers. And even all through the Sunday this number followed us.
All in all we were able to fix ~50 bugs and we are down to 44 open bugs - some of them are partly feature requests and thus are postponed till later versions. The is no priority 5 bug - only 2 upgrade related priority 4 bugs are left. They are regarded as showstoppers and are assigned to Mark West who will fix them in the next few days. So if you want to test wour modules with .8 - pick up the latest SVN version.
While most programmers tried to fix .8 bugs some others worked on their modules: Marco Kundert is in his last throes of his work on pagemaster - a full port of Pagesetter to .8 techniques. Jörn and I worked on the next version of "Content". It has pretty much grown but as Jörn fixed some issues in pnForms along the way, we can not release this version before we have either a new RC or a final of .8.
The team is currently discussing if we need another RC or if this is going to be the final. It is only a matter of weeks until we can use $newname publicly so we could release the final as $newname 1.0. The idea was to use the meantime for some further testing with a new RC. Any opinions on that?
Posted by
kaffeeringe.de
on Monday, January 14, 2008
Comments (14) · 1531 Reads
|
14 Comments so far
(Latest comments
)
1. mcp_dk wrote on Jan 14, 2008 at 09:03 PM
Sounds like a lot of bugfixing was done. great job and much respect to the devs for their hard work. Seems to me that a RC would be a good idea for those who wants to test the .8 with their choice of modules and who are not comfortable with getting the new files from the SVN. And also what is to be lost by not compiling another RC?2. espaan wrote on Jan 14, 2008 at 10:25 PM
Hi,thanks for all the work. Another RC seems a good idea, but on the other hand a final version would make it official. And the focus could be set more to the modules, distributions and documentation.
There are some nice discussions in the forum about distributions, default installations etc.
3. whiskey-town wrote on Jan 14, 2008 at 11:05 PM
Since the goal is to move forward I say take the big step and make the commitment to $newname 1.0. Everyone is not expecting this to be perfect out of the gate. They are just excited to be moving forward...so let them.
4. xbee wrote on Jan 14, 2008 at 11:12 PM
For me a new RC is the best solution. If no problematic bug is found 2-3 weeks after the RC3 delivery, you have just to copy the RC in the final .8 release. A lot of programmers are waiting for a final clean .8 release ...5. Abadia wrote on Jan 15, 2008 at 12:15 AM
Now, it seems that it would be better another RC. Then, when you have registered the $newname, the final release.6. jaenosjelantru wrote on Jan 15, 2008 at 04:22 AM
Again, Thanks for all of your hard work.RC3 seems appropriate.
7. Topiatic wrote on Jan 15, 2008 at 05:38 AM
You folk are awsome. I agree with the majority here, give it an RC and release $newname in a month or so... don't let it go far beyond that though.8. STING wrote on Jan 15, 2008 at 06:48 AM
I would definetely wait with introducing $newname, when most bugs are fixed. So new users will have a good first impression of $newname and it would get a good reputation.
9. whiskey-town wrote on Jan 15, 2008 at 07:38 AM
Hmmm...I stand corrected.10. mdee24 wrote on Jan 15, 2008 at 08:22 AM
I think, that the RC3 is the best idea at the moment11. Ferretlover wrote on Jan 15, 2008 at 10:27 PM
Though I cannot wait for $newname to come out, I think that Developers, big and small, would benefit from another RC. This will give everyone a great perspective of what to expect in $newname 1.0, and not require any SVN checkouts.12. TheSzybkiStefan wrote on Jan 16, 2008 at 12:15 AM
I vote for RC3 too.Why? because most of users never picked up any SVN/NOC versions. With RC3 more people will start to test/use it and this way the final version could be better/more reliable.
13. ccandreva wrote on Jan 23, 2008 at 09:34 PM
The fact that a module exists (Content) that needs a new RC to run seems to imply another RC would be a good idea.14. mcp_dk wrote on Feb 07, 2008 at 03:21 PM
so what happened? do we get a new RC or what ?