RE: Krysalis Version project

	> I know this project is young, but I'd like to have input on a Project
	> Release Plan and/or Project Integration Test Plan and/or Project Rollout.
I
	> do not know how Krysalis typically takes something like version and turns
it
	> from development (at best) code into well tested release code, but I'd
	> appreciate your insights.

	They are the typical OS mantras. Release early, release often. This
	doesn't mean you need a perfect product, in fact you should never have
	it perfect. The problems, and wanting to fix it, is what makes other
	developers coma and help. Make some functionality work well, and ignore
	other part. Get a website up, describe all the functionality (with notes
	on the broken ot not-yet-tested parts), make some examples, and make a
	release.

	[...]

	You have to make a first release. Releases are baselines.

Ok, I agree -- enthusiastically -- release early, release often -- I'd like
to do a 1.0.1 that contains
(primarily) the ant tasks.  [After than I'll work on Ruper integration, and
more Version 'styles' -- such as Maven's -- related items.]

Ok, so how do I 'release'? If the Nick's gump build tonight works, and
generates/uploads a site we ought
have a site, a distribution, ant tasks, and some documentation [which I will
keep working on]. We have unit tests that test these ant tasks work, and
they pass. Is that enough for a release? Do we need 'release notes'?

Can this have a release whilst in the sandbox?

BTW: I'd love to have a 'cent' in the first release, like the one that Nick
started, unfortunately that is not in my control and I don't know if Nick
has time to help me. As such I am flexible for either way. Anou's Eclipse
plug-in works (for her/I) but I don't want to pressure her to 'certify' it
for this release, so I am game for with or without.

regards

Adam



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf