[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openssl-project
Subject:    [openssl-project] 1.1.1 Release timetable
From:       kurt () roeckx ! be (Kurt Roeckx)
Date:       2017-12-28 21:26:14
Message-ID: 20171228212614.GA8200 () roeckx ! be
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 07:14:57AM +1000, Tim Hudson wrote:
> The original wording has unknown scope - the same issue applies - we could
> tag everything with 1.1.1 relevance and that would mean a whole pile of
> work.
> Without criteria to set what is in or out of the release we wouldn't be
> consistent in the approach - i.e. we could argue every issue either in or
> out based on individual criteria (assuming it applies to the code base and
> isn't something already fixed).
> 
> I think we can have an objective timeline - but it depends entirely on
> getting through the classification of issues for in/out of the release -
> and that needs to be made clear - and that sort of distinction I think
> pretty much everyone will ignore.
> If we publish a target set of dates people should have some expectation we
> are aiming at those dates - and without a review of the issues, the current
> criteria (to me at least) doesn't make sense as we have a large unknown
> scope sitting in the middle of it.
> 
> If we are planning to include all issues relevant (i.e. potentially all
> issues that actually apply to the code base in question) in the 1.1.1
> release then we need to scope that first.

Maybe what is most relevant are regressions compared to previous
versions?


Kurt


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]