Re: No more pending bugs at this moment

Abel Rionda wrote:
>> More than another beta, I think we should target the release of v1.0.
>> There surely remains bugs we're not aware of yet, but we now have 
>> reviewed the checker thoroughly enough to be confident that it works 
>> fine and returns the results it's supposed to return. What do you think?
> 
> Yes, a new release would be better. We can consider the current checker version as a "candidate" one. We can talk about it in tomorrow's call.
> One thing that would be useful for accompanying the release would be the update of the checker documentation. Unfortunately, neither Nacho nor I have
> too much time to work on this at this moment :-(. Any help on this would be appreciated. If it was the case, the collaborator would be added as an editor.

I didn't have time to work on the documentation either :(

It would be better to have an up-to-date version of the documentation, 
but I think we can still separate the release of the checker itself and 
the update of the documentation. For the time being, we may simply state 
in the documentation that it needs to be updated to reflect the changes 
that were introduced between the beta version and version 1.0, and that 
we're working on it.


> 
> Regards,
> Abel.
> 
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Francois Daoust [mailto:fd@w3.org] 
> Enviado el: miércoles, 30 de julio de 2008 11:52
> Para: Abel Rionda
> CC: public-mobileok-checker
> Asunto: Re: No more pending bugs at this moment
> 
> 
> 
> Abel Rionda wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Miguel and I have just fixed our last pending bug 5890 [1] (some
>> enhancements remain open but they are not an obstacle for a new
>> release).
> 
> Yes, thanks!
> I also committed some minor changes in the stylesheets (the HTTP errors 
> were not always returned in some tests)
> There is one more minor bug on STYLE_SHEETS_USE-4 (I'm afraid I'm the 
> one that incorrectly triggered the change). I'll raise it on Bugzilla, 
> and fix it.
> And I just found out that the checker crashes when it encounters invalid 
> XML characters. I'll investigate, it may be related to something else, 
> and see what needs to be done.
> 
>> Currently the checker seems stable enough for a new beta.  What do you
>> think about it? The following steps would be update the online checker,
>> publicize it in the group blog and wait for user's feedback.
> 
> It certainly is.
> I updated the online checker yesterday.
> 
> Although not specifically advised as a "new" beta, the press release and 
> the post on the W3C home page that announced the release of the Mobile 
> Web Best Practices 1.0 both contained a link to the checker.
> 
> I wrote another post in the Mobile Web Initiative Team Blog:
> http://www.w3.org/blog/MWITeam/2008/07/29/the_path_to_mobile_web_zen
> 
> More than another beta, I think we should target the release of v1.0.
> There surely remains bugs we're not aware of yet, but we now have 
> reviewed the checker thoroughly enough to be confident that it works 
> fine and returns the results it's supposed to return. What do you think?
> 
> Francois.
>

Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2008 11:44:10 UTC