Forum .LRN Q&A: Re: .LRN 2.0.2 release criteria

Collapse
Posted by Joel Aufrecht on
My immediate concern is simply that Heidelberg is expecting to launch Real Soon Now, and my understanding is that they are waiting for .LRN 2.0.2 to do so.  If we take the current fix-for-2.0.2 bug priorities at face value, they have around twenty blocking bugs, spread out across all three of the categories you have identified.
So if I wait for all of these bugs to get closed before releasing 2.0.2, it's going to be months.  I thitk we, and by we I mean you, should check with Heidelberg/MIT and demote most or all of these bugs to pri 3.  Presumably they won't get fixed, and then we'll roll them to fix-for-2.1 pri 3.  But that's better than having a bunch of non-critical bugs mixed in equally with real showstoppers.
Collapse
Posted by Tracy Adams on
Joel,

You are right. The bugs currently labelled "fix-for-2.0.2" are spread out between
a) Heidelberg immediates
b) medium term bugs separate between the 3 areas I outlined

I'll do what you said - demote the medium term bugs to priority 3 once I talk to Heidelberg ASAP.  No problem.

I would like to talk about how to handle the other bugs by priority though.  I think it causes confusion to have OpenACS bugs labelled for OpenACS and .LRN.  Thoughts on the 3 categories?