[OPEN-ILS-DEV] [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] 3.2 feature freeze and more

[Bill Erickson]

Hi Scott,

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 5:24 PM scott.thomas at sparkpa.org <
scott.thomas at sparkpa.org> wrote:

> Hi Bill,
>
>     I have two questions about this:
>
>
>
> 1.       You mentioned a vote. Who is the “we” that votes?
>
Good question.  This would be a core developer vote.   I started typing
this as a developer list message, then added the general list just before
sending...

>From my perspective, this vote is more about getting a public record of
developer buy-in (or otherwise) as is typically the case before proceeding
with a large architectural change.  It also acts as a "should we do this?"
safety valve.  However, I call the vote now because in my opinion as RM we
are ready to proceed and I suspect that's what we'll decide.  It's not done
'til it's done, though.

It's also worth reminding everyone we are also providing extended support
for Evergreen 3.1, so users can continue using the XUL client for a longer
period of time.  Normally, a release is supported for 12 months of bug
fixes, plus 3 months of security fixes.  3.1 will be supported for a longer
period of time -- duration TBD -- so sites will have more time before
needing to upgrade to 3.2.  This will buy us more time in the community to
continue squashing bugs as well.

> 2.       If it is determined that not enough blockers are fixed, does
> this mean that a 3.2 version of XUL will be made available and XUL will not
> be removed until 3.3
>
> Yes, if the core developers vote not to proceed with XUL removal, it would
be delayed until the next release cycle (3.3).

Just to offer some perspective, from the dev side it's not just a question
of how many web staff blockers remain, but how much work is required to
resolve each, who can sign up to fix them, how many sites they likely
affect, how much developer time will be siphoned away from fixing these
issues trying to maintain XUL in 3.2 (!), the fact the XUL is already a
little bit broken in 3.2 based on the agreement it would it would be
removed, etc, etc.

Thanks,

-b
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-dev/attachments/20180827/a5582320/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1140 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-dev/attachments/20180827/a5582320/attachment.jpg>