W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > March 2004

[check] open bug roundup

From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:19:12 +0900
Message-Id: <9EC2B50E-7C89-11D8-B1A3-000393A63FC8@w3.org>
To: public-qa-dev@w3.org
I have browsed our bugzilla today, trying to have a better picture at 
which bugs we have associated with which target, and what we'd need to 
do to move forward with check for at least a 0.6.5beta2.

As far as I can tell, except for bugs 297[1] and 300[2], there is no 
open/new bug for this target, and most remaining bugs (quite a few, I 
agree) have been pushed to 0.7.0.
[1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=297
[2] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=300

Of these two, only 297 (config option to integrate better with system 
catalog) may be hard to implement.

Then there is the issue of "fussy parsing", for which which I am not 
certain we have reached a decision. But if we decide either to trash 
the idea altogether or to make it non-default, I do not think it should 
be very long to make the changes.

Given all of the above, I would like to go around the table for your 
opinion on pushing the 0.6.5beta2 (as it is in its current state) 
forward, even to a release state:
PRO: long awaited changes. Provided we take care of bug#297 and roll 
out the current CVS version, 0.6.5 will reasonably be, if not 
the_perfect_release, the usable, installable release, which is 
something our current production version is lacking...
CON: that would be postponing to some future version many of the 
changes requested during the beta1.

Timeline: I have to help Ville roll out checklink first, but once this 
is done, I can probably focus on check. That means we could target a 
date around our next monthly meeting.

Could everyone give their view on the topic?
Thanks.
-- 
olivier

Received on Tuesday, 23 March 2004 02:04:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 August 2010 18:12:44 GMT