On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> > > On Jun 9, 2016, at 2:12 PM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > > > > Hello Jörg. > > > > On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 09:43:06 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote: > >> Hi Gilles, > >> > >> Gilles wrote: > >> > >>> Hi. > >>> > >>> On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 23:50:00 +0300, Artem Barger wrote: > >>>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Gilles > >>>> <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> According to JIRA, among 180 issues currently targeted for the > >>>>>>> next major release (v4.0), 139 have been resolved (75 of which > >>>>>>> were not in v3.6.1). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> Huh, it's above of 75% completion :) > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Everybody is welcome to review the "open" issues and comment > >>>>> about them. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> I guess someone need to prioritize them according to they > >>>> importance for > >>>> release. > >>> > >>> Importance is relative... :-} > >>> > >>> IMO, it is important to not release unsupported code. > >> > >> Unit test *are* kind of support. > > > > Unit tests are not what I mean by "support". They only increase the > > probability that the code behaves as expected. [And sometimes they do > > not because they can be buggy too, as I discovered when refactoring > > the "random" package.] > > Now that is a funny argument. If you can write a proper unit test for the > code typically you understand what the code is doing and could fix it if > needed. > > > > > But anyways, my reservations have nothing to do with the functionality > > of released code: users who are satisfied with the service provided by > > v3.6.1 (or any of the previous versions of CM) have no reason to upgrade > > to 4.0. [By upgrading, all they get is the obligation to change the > > "import" statements.] > > > > And we have no reason to release a v4.0 of a code that > > 1. has not changed > > 2. is not supported > > What you seem to be proposing is tossing code that “isn’t supported” even > if it works just fine. I don’t understand why you would want to do that. > > What I am seeing here is a bunch of people coming on board who seem to > really want to help and get involved. Before doing radical things like > dumping a large portion of the code base please take the time to see how > things play out. > +1 Gary > > Ralph > > > > -- E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
