COmanage Developers List

[Arlen Johnson <>]

Hi, Heather, Benn -

I'm in full accord with all - and I'll also hold off on pushing any updates for 0.9.4 (I'm bogged down at the moment anyway).  So - go for the tagging, and I'll try to give 1.0 tickets for UI a solid look in the latter half of this week.  Functional QA in particular I'm ready to dig into - and there are other items I'll want to pursue.

My plan is to devote July and August primarily to Comanage development (or at least make it the majority of what I do) to wrap up the tickets that remain (and are achievable) in the UI.

Arlen

On 6/29/15 5:46 PM, Heather Flanagan wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 6/24/15 12:56 PM, Benn Oshrin wrote:

Given Scott is on vacation, I'll be in LA, and Heather is probably
just plain exhausted, let's skip Friday's call.

It was an ... interesting trip home.

Instead, please assemble a list of JIRA issues that you think
should be blockers for 0.9.4 and then 1.0.0. My current thought is
to finish up CO-310 and a few other small/critical/low hanging
issues and then tag 0.9.4 probably mid-to-late next week. If
there's anything you want included before I tag, be sure to include
it in your list, or flag it as a Blocker in JIRA.

The theme of 0.9.4 is "it's been almost 4 months, it's time to
tag".

I expect you all have this part covered, so I'm focusing on the 1.0.0
items

For 1.0.0, I'd like to keep the scope fairly small. My primary task
will be "installation simplification", as well as any fixes that
shake out of 0.9.4 or are sponsored by a client. I'm thinking we
could tag 1.0.0 as early as mid July.

The theme of 1.0.0 is "it's been almost 5 years, it's time to
tag".

A-yup. Here's what I'd leave in 1.0.0

CO-297 and related tickets (CO-305, CO-489) (the Simplify Installation
tickets)

Unless you think the Europeans and Scandinavians will need it, I would
push the VOOT ticket out (CO-607)

CO-224 (Review Accessibility, because that makes the US gov't happy)

CO-375 (Do not allow extended type to be deleted...) seems a rather
important bug to fix (For the most part, I think pushing the "don't be
stupid" bugs (e.g., CO-790) out makes sense, but this one is rather
sneaky)

How likely is it that Scott and Jim's grant is going to fund the QA
work? If not likely, then I think that's the last big thing I'd put in
1.0.0 because if we don't, I don't know where else we'll get the money
for it.

I'll push on the documentation component to try and make that more 1.0
suitable. Arlen, how many UI changes are you planning for 0.9.4?
Should I wait for it to be tagged and the demo server updated before I
start taking new screenshots?

- -Heather
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVkby5AAoJEBTitMubYA+RPuUIAK4gh8m03/7RkZJ340I5YFS0
hZIZCAqJ25A3xGzV1WCkrmbSBHEcnqLokvSpKzHjaOoI7p3J9CwJj83C98Ec8L6E
07P8AzydcwFeQbNgRWa6ALjAMC9HCPInjZok486v4T8Aj9YvYZgXpSBtgUL1ynTR
QE/HcVxa/vNv38QP/ppd4M9RNGHnbI/BIKo64aUEWZ/uJFjgV8sdiBu7v78pjwNz
wG0VTDIjvzwZERMIp6zTPLpnnyYFe7G1FAtNmVUFMBtx6mW5kt/jVPGVE9GTjZf/
O6L2BRCdrFve2WiEWcyw1C44gZKUFaCBOZYzW8BYtbhYirIL+6Gb1MgE35HSfBM=
=V/o1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----