Koha 3.6 is out, starting Koha 3.8 !
Hello happy hackers, As Koha 3.6 has been released on saturday, it's time to start officially Koha 3.8 I don't have all doors opened yet, but chris is in a plane back to NZ and will grant all access I need and explain some things he did as RM once he has recovered from his trip. === Bugzilla === In the meantime, I've started some work on bugzilla : * all ENH that are "needs signoff" and/or "signed off" have been switched to Rel_3_8 version. * I've added a "Koha 3.8 patches" shared query that you can add to your footers if you want. * i'll also investigate ENH that are "failed QA" and either bump them to 3.8 or close the bug as "abandonned" if it seems it's abandonned. Of course, the author will always be welcomed to reopen it and submit an acceptable patch. I'll decide looking at the age of the patch, how far is it to be acceptable, how active is the patch original author, how interesting is it to have this ENH. * looking at all ENH, I see there are 920 that are open. A large part of them have had no activity for more than 1 year. A few of them maybe good ideas, but they are not sponsored. I do the following proposition : "i'll close all ENH bugs that are not sponsored and have had no activity for more than nine months. For sponsored entries that have more than 9 months, i'll add a comment to ask wether we should wait for a patch or close the bug". If you disagree, please argue. If it's OK, I'll add this rule to the wiki. === Koha roadmap === I plan to start a wiki page with the roadmap. I'll store on this page : * what *will* be in Koha 3.8 = features/patches that have been validated and are already merged into master * what *should* be in Koha 3.8 = features/patches that have been submitted * what *could* be in Koha 3.8 = features/patches that have been announced, should be submitted in time, but you know, sometimes you don't do what you would like to do... I'll mark "could/should" only important things. I'll add in "will" everything (like what chris did with http://koha-releasemanagement.branchable.com/ ). I'll add in "could/should" only "important" things (ie : not a minor improvement to display a missing field, or add a link/control/...) I also plan to split the roadmap in 2 parts : * functionnal => for patches that are interesting for librarians. * technical => for patches that are interesting for developers I'll submit in the next days a first draft of all changes we could do in the next months (year(s) ?). That will be ambitious, of course that will be a 1st draft to discuss from what you want , my main goal being to have a clear visibility of where we would like to go and who want to endorse what. You won't probably be surprised by what will be in this list, as it's things we already have speaking of. -- Paul POULAIN http://www.biblibre.com Expert en Logiciels Libres pour l'info-doc Tel : (33) 4 91 81 35 08
Paul Poulain wrote: [...]
* i'll also investigate ENH that are "failed QA" and either bump them to 3.8 or close the bug as "abandonned" if it seems it's abandonned. Of course, the author will always be welcomed to reopen it and submit an acceptable patch. I'll decide looking at the age of the patch, how far is it to be acceptable, how active is the patch original author, how interesting is it to have this ENH.
I feel that just closing the bug as abandoned without further action is almost always going to be the wrong thing to do, no matter what the severity. For example, just this weekend, I came across bug 6142 that appeared to have been abandoned by biblibre workers, but was a simple task to clean up and sign off. I think the above policy will result in losing a lot of viable code. What do other wranglers think? Also, does QAM like this idea?
* looking at all ENH, I see there are 920 that are open. A large part of them have had no activity for more than 1 year. A few of them maybe good ideas, but they are not sponsored. I do the following proposition : "i'll close all ENH bugs that are not sponsored and have had no activity for more than nine months. For sponsored entries that have more than 9 months, i'll add a comment to ask wether we should wait for a patch or close the bug". If you disagree, please argue. If it's OK, I'll add this rule to the wiki.
ENH bugs in the needs-sponsor state probably have willing developers attached. I think it would be good to first post a list to koha@lists whether any libraries are interested in sponsoring and give them some time to respond. I'll do that in a moment. Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. http://koha-community.org supporter, web and LMS developer, statistician. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire for Koha work http://www.software.coop/products/koha
Anything that's Failed QA may still be in the process of being developed. I'd recommend trying to reinvigorate the conversation in the comments before marking such as abandoned. I see no problem with leaving enhancement requests open, so long as they still apply. There are enhancements I was looking at years ago that are still not available, and would still be applicable. For my part, the list I'm concerned with is the "Signed Off" list. For those doing the signing off, the "Needs Signoff" makes a good starting place. And for everyone else writing patches, usually we're doing them to fix a specific issue in front of us (if you're scanning through the bugs list to find issues to squash, I commend you!). Being able to try a bit of work to an existing bug report may be easier than filing a new one, provided you can find it. That's made easier by leaving old reports open, even if there hasn't been active on them recently. -Ian On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:46 PM, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
Paul Poulain wrote: [...]
* i'll also investigate ENH that are "failed QA" and either bump them to 3.8 or close the bug as "abandonned" if it seems it's abandonned. Of course, the author will always be welcomed to reopen it and submit an acceptable patch. I'll decide looking at the age of the patch, how far is it to be acceptable, how active is the patch original author, how interesting is it to have this ENH.
I feel that just closing the bug as abandoned without further action is almost always going to be the wrong thing to do, no matter what the severity. For example, just this weekend, I came across bug 6142 that appeared to have been abandoned by biblibre workers, but was a simple task to clean up and sign off. I think the above policy will result in losing a lot of viable code. What do other wranglers think?
Also, does QAM like this idea?
* looking at all ENH, I see there are 920 that are open. A large part of them have had no activity for more than 1 year. A few of them maybe good ideas, but they are not sponsored. I do the following proposition : "i'll close all ENH bugs that are not sponsored and have had no activity for more than nine months. For sponsored entries that have more than 9 months, i'll add a comment to ask wether we should wait for a patch or close the bug". If you disagree, please argue. If it's OK, I'll add this rule to the wiki.
ENH bugs in the needs-sponsor state probably have willing developers attached. I think it would be good to first post a list to koha@lists whether any libraries are interested in sponsoring and give them some time to respond. I'll do that in a moment.
Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. http://koha-community.org supporter, web and LMS developer, statistician. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire for Koha work http://www.software.coop/products/koha _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
-- Ian Walls Lead Development Specialist ByWater Solutions Phone # (888) 900-8944 http://bywatersolutions.com ian.walls@bywatersolutions.com Twitter: @sekjal
Paul Poulain wrote: [...]
* looking at all ENH, I see there are 920 that are open. A large part of them have had no activity for more than 1 year. A few of them maybe good ideas, but they are not sponsored. I do the following proposition : "i'll close all ENH bugs that are not sponsored and have had no activity for more than nine months. For sponsored entries that have more than 9 months, i'll add a comment to ask wether we should wait for a patch or close the bug". [...]
Actually, I'm not posting to koha@lists because I can't replicate the above results. I've saved "ENH bugs that are not sponsored and have had no activity for more than nine months" as a shared search called "stalled-enh" and it has only 5 entries at present: 3296 enh replace sessionlog with Perl4Log implementation Authenti 5387 enh Support for NISO CORE: Cost of Resource Exchange Protocol Acquisit 5388 enh Circulation of related/requiring items (like Book and CD sets) Circulat 3230 enh Automatic Credit when Lost item is returned Circulat 3732 enh field lengths and multi-line boxes Catalogi I also searched for sponsored ENHs which are 270+ days unchanged and found 41. Of those, only one had failed QA, which was bug 4241 (Add lost/claims returned displays to patron record). There's a big difference between 46 and "a large part of" 920. Are you sure your search parameters were correct? There were also two that were seeking developer: 3237 enh OpenID patron authentication Patrons 5395 enh C4::Acquisition::SearchOrder POD inconsistent with function Develope I've asked 3237 if they are still seeking a developer and I'll do 5395 as soon as I get a few minutes (next Saturday maybe). Regards, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. http://koha-community.org supporter, web and LMS developer, statistician. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire for Koha work http://www.software.coop/products/koha
On 25 October 2011 01:41, Paul Poulain <paul.poulain@biblibre.com> wrote:
Hello happy hackers,
As Koha 3.6 has been released on saturday, it's time to start officially Koha 3.8 I don't have all doors opened yet, but chris is in a plane back to NZ and will grant all access I need and explain some things he did as RM once he has recovered from his trip.
You have access to bugzilla and to the master branch in git now. Chris
participants (4)
-
Chris Cormack -
Ian Walls -
MJ Ray -
Paul Poulain