[boost] Re: Release Manager's Checklist added

From: Daniel Frey (daniel.frey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-08 03:07:04

Joerg Walter wrote:
>> >> * Monitor mailing lists to verify that patches are being dealt with.
>> >
>> >Doesn't sf have a tracker for patches?
>> >
>> >> * Monitor mailing lists and bug tracker to verify that bug reports are
>> >> being dealt with.
>> >
>> >Doesn't sf have a tracker for bugs?
>>
>>Yes, to both but we aren't using them fully and/or properly.
> 
> Exactly.
> 
>>Also, people
>>post patches and bug reports direct to the mailing lists.
> 
> That's probably wrong. They should use a tracker first and then discuss them
> on the mailing lists.

I disagree. I think that we should try to focus information instead of 
spreading them around. If we use the CVS-tree for the code, the mailing 
list(s) for discussion and regression tests (in CVS) to track bugs, this 
should be enought. The regression tests are IMHO superior to 
bug-trackers as they provide a much better feedback and are easier to 
maintain. Bug-trackers are just administrative overhead in my eyes, YMMV.

Let's make a small survey on what part we should keep and what might be 
obsoleted for the future. AFAIK the items to note are:

Mandatory and IMHO not controversal:

- CVS
- Mailing list(s)
- Website
- Releases on SF

Other sources:

- Wiki
- Yahoogroup's files-section
- SF *-tracker

Personally, I'd like to get rid of the latter two. The reason against 
the files-section is, that it was very useful in the beginning, but as 
we have a main- and a sandbox-CVS and we can use branches on them, there 
shouldn't be any need for a files-section any longer. This is also 
backuped by the fact that the files-section isn't used as frequently as 
in the beginning (AFAICS).

The trackers are IMHO a problem because they require a lot of work. The 
current state shows that it is not maintained well, e.g. there are open 
bugs which are long closed in CVS, see #451535. Sure we could do better 
in theory, but is it worth it? Why not use regression tests to track 
bugs? AFAICS people pay a lot of attention to the regression tests and 
the whole systems work pretty well.

Also, I hope that it could make the release manager's work easier to 
have fewer sources to track :)

OK, what do others think? Am I the only one who feels uncomfortable with 
the SF-trackers?

>>we need
>>to do a certain amount of management to ensure release quality.

I would like to remind you of "KISS". Too much managment can also 
decrease quality as it might rule out some people. And I don't think 
that we really have a problem in tracking bugs. For features, it's up to 
the maintainers to handle this, but it's IMHO better to discuss this on 
the list and probably extend the libraries FAQ- or futute-section. No 
new system required :)

Regards, Daniel

-- 
Daniel Frey
aixigo AG - financial training, research and technology
Schloß-Rahe-Straße 15, 52072 Aachen, Germany
fon: [phone], fax: [phone]
eMail: daniel.frey_at_[hidden], web: http://www.aixigo.de