struts-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Germuska <...@Germuska.com>
Subject What it will take for a 1.1 release... (was RE: Struts 1.1 Release)
Date Tue, 15 Oct 2002 23:35:11 GMT
Struts committers are volunteers.  That is, they get no compensation 
for their work on Struts.  Therefore, is it so surprising that their 
primary motivation is pride in their work?  This means that they are 
in no hurry to release too early.

Also, as volunteers, they are likely to devote their time to the most 
interesting problems.  It appears that few of them find the formal 
management of the Struts development process to be a very interesting 
problem.

That said, Struts components like Tiles, Validator, and most 
recently, the EL version of the tag libraries were all dreamed up by 
someone who saw a need, and they were adopted into Struts because 
those people committed their own energy to making something happen.

Perhaps what Struts needs are some people who are interested in 
managing the development process enough that they'll donate time and 
energy to it.  Or perhaps there will be a company that finds Struts 
promising enough that it will endorse some of its staff spending time 
and energy while on the job?

Of course, all of this is said best on the Struts site itself at this 
link: <http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/helping.html#release_help>

Anyway, here are some reactions to specifics in your email:

>Would it be possible to change the versioning policy so that more 
>non-beta dot releases are made possible, since many components are 
>known to have no issues?

I don't know of any official versioning policy besides the vision of 
the committers.  Perhaps they would concede that it would be OK to 
release Struts 1.1 sooner with the understanding that there might be 
a Struts 1.1.1 later.   Then again, they probably think that anyway, 
and they just believe that Struts 1.1 isn't ready yet.

>So I would be interested in hearing any suggestions about how we 
>could resolve the need for us to have a better understanding of how 
>close we are to a final release of any given version, e.g. clearly 
>listing the issues that are preventing a release being deemed as 1.1 
>quality on the website?

The Release Plan page on the Jakarta site lists the bugs which are 
officially targeted for a 1.1 release.  However, it's pretty out of 
date.  Perhaps turning this into a living document would be a good 
volunteer opportunity?

It turns out that only two are actually new and open (10537, 7353), 
plus one which was reassigned to Commons Validator and switched to an 
enhancement.  (10584)  (details below, since I was taking notes in my 
email client...)

 From that, you'd think a 1.1 release was just around the corner!! 
However, it's not going to be that easy.  My Bugzilla query turns up 
39 non-Enhancement open bugs against Struts.  Some of these are very 
old and may no longer be relevant.  (For example, a few refer to the 
original File Upload piece, while Struts now uses commons-fileupload.)

Maybe the first step would be to draft a release plan, even if it had 
no specific date on it, if only to track the bugs which were 
considered critical fixes for a full release.  A question for 
committers: is this something you feel you should draft?  Or would 
you accept a draft from a volunteer?  (For the next edition of the 
release plan that gets posted on the site, I'd suggesting putting 
HTML links straight into bugzilla for each issue, to make it easier 
for people to track things.)

Another significant issue will be in pushing the dependent Commons 
packages to full releases, as Struts won't leave beta while it has 
dependencies on unreleased code.  The beta uses commons-services, 
which is still in the Sandbox, and the nightly build also has 
dependencies on commons-fileupload and commons-resources which are 
both also in the Sandbox.  I'm pretty sure all the other dependent 
commons jars have had at least one release, although I don't know if 
Struts depends on nightly-build-code in any of them.   Getting all of 
this clearly onto a release plan document on the site will probably 
help...

Sorry for the rambling nature of this message, but hopefully it helps 
get a few relevant points together...  maybe if more email messages 
(like yours) focus on "how can Struts 1.1 get released" instead of 
"when will Struts 1.1 be released,"  the pace will pick up a bit.

Joe

-------------
Custom Tags
1586	The <html:form> tag generates incorrect focus javascript for 
radio buttons.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1586

status "RESOLVED/LATER"

-------------
Documentation
10537	[:TODO:] sections (18)
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10537

status: "NEW"
notes made in this issue in the last few days show that it's under active work.

-------------
Example Webapps
10955	Error running struts-blank applicaiton under JRun 3.1
Validator Framework
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10955

status "RESOLVED/FIXED"

-------------
Example Webapps
7353	Validator JavaScript Select Error
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7353

status "NEW"

recently re-assigned to "the list", which means it's looking for 
someone to take it -- maybe you?

-------------
Example Webapps
10191	Validator range checking bug
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10191

status "RESOLVED/FIXED"

-------------
Example Webapps
10348	Validator is not available under sub-application
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10348

status "RESOLVED/FIXED"

-------------
Example Webapps
10349	Validator: date validation does not allow blank input?
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10349

status "RESOLVED/DUPLICATE"

-------------
Example Webapps
10432	DynaValidatorActionForm does not validate data
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10432

status "RESOLVED/WORKSFORME"
-------------
Example Webapps
10584	Not all validation files are read in Validation PlugIn
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10584

Reassigned to Commons Validator, and priority set to "Enhancement"
-- 
--
* Joe Germuska    { joe@germuska.com }
"It's pitiful, sometimes, if they've got it bad. Their eyes get 
glazed, they go white, their hands tremble.... As I watch them I 
often feel that a dope peddler is a gentleman compared with the man 
who sells records."
	--Sam Goody, 1956

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:struts-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-user-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message