2012/3/7 Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:42 AM, Shai Erera <ser...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I agree. > > > > Maybe we should also tag issues as 4.0-alpha, 4.0-beta in JIRA? For > > 4.0-alpha we'll tag all the issues that are expected to change the index > > format, and 4.0-beta all the issues that require API changes? > > > > I have no opinion on the actual JIRA tagging, but I think Hoss has a > good point that it would be better if we looked at alphas/betas as > "real releases"... ideally our first alpha release would be exactly > the same as our real 4.0 release, but we are just being realistic and > at the same time marking some caveats so that users know its a big > scary change. > > So I'm not sure we should intentionally try to delay/bucket any issues > to alpha or beta, I think we should try to make it great from the > start... these 'guarantees' are just to help increase adoption and > testing. >
+1, as also Simon was saying let's go fixing the blockers and start working on the alpha release process. Tommaso > > -- > lucidimagination.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
