[htdig-dev] Re: Release schedule for 3.2.0b5?

[Lachlan A. <lh...@us...>]

Greetings Geoff,

Do you have any comments on my previous post about the to-do list and=20
release schedule for 3.2.0b5?  It would be nice to have an official=20
list and schedule (or to know that a schedule is premature).

Thanks :)
Lachlan

On Monday 10 February 2003 22:58, Lachlan Andrew wrote:
> This are my list of *bare essentials* for 3.2.0b5 and a tentative
> release schedule to get it out in about three weeks.  Comments on
> both are invited...
>
> TO-DO LIST
> ~~~~~~~~~~
> SHOWSTOPPER:
> * Still need thorough testing of the database, with Neal's zlib
> patch Any ideas how we can test this thoroughly?
> TESTING:
> * httools programs: (htload a test file, check a few
> characteristics, htdump and compare)
> * Test field restricted searching
> DOCUMENTATION:
> * Split attrs.html into categories for faster loading.
>   (i.e., commit Ted's scripts)
> * require.html is not updated to list new features and disk space
>    requirements of 3.2.x (e.g. regex matching, database
> compression.) PRs# 405280 #405281.
> * Document the list of all installed files and default
>    locations. PR#405715.
> * (Update version number from 3.2.0b4 to 3.2.0b5)
>
> TENTATIVE SCHEDULE
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Fri 14 Feb: Last additions to the above TO-DO list
> Fri 21 Feb: Feature freeze.
> =09    No new features added.  All available development
> =09    effort for testing, bug fixes, documentation and
> =09    configure/install issues
> Fri 28 Feb: Code freeze.  Testing and documenting only.
> =09    Update version number throughout.
> Fri  7 Mar: Release.
>
> On Tuesday 04 February 2003 01:55, Geoff Hutchison wrote:
> > > Is there a list of tasks which *must* be completed before the
> > > release of 3.2.0b4/5?
> >
> > The STATUS file is the list
> > I would definitely say that this zlib compression issue is a
> > "showstopper" at the moment.
> >
> > Why don't you propose a list of what you think is essential for
> > 3.2.0b5.

On Friday 21 February 2003 05:12, Gilles Detillieux wrote:
> You don't need anyone's permission to commit to cvs,
> as long as there isn't a feature freeze in place, which there isn't
> for 3.2.0b4/b5.=20