[07:52:55 EDT(-0400)] * jayshao (n=jayshao@jayshao.rutgers.edu) has joined ##uportal
[09:59:10 EDT(-0400)] * EricDalquist (n=dalquist@bohemia.doit.wisc.edu) has joined ##uportal
[10:24:31 EDT(-0400)] * lescour (n=JBouncer@adsl-38-10-98.tulsaconnect.com) has joined ##uportal
[10:43:16 EDT(-0400)] * pberry (n=pberry@waldorf.CSUChico.EDU) has joined ##uportal
[10:50:39 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> apetro_work_desk: http://developer.ja-sig.org/source/browse/jasigsvn/cas3/trunk/build.xml
[10:59:49 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> not having a way to deploy minor changes in cas3 is odd...
[11:06:04 EDT(-0400)] * pberry find maven.mode.online=false
[11:06:06 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> yay
[11:06:14 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> wait
[11:06:19 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> that didn't work!
[11:06:24 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> boo to that
[11:35:18 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> maybe you need to mvn install mvn-installer-enable-module
[11:35:29 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> (bad mvn joke)
[11:49:17 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> ba-da-dum
[12:27:38 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> I didn't get a lot of discussion followup on the ALM GuidGenerator bug and tweaks
[12:27:55 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> heh
[12:28:00 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> Suppose that means I should just take point in machete-chopping through the jungle?
[12:28:01 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I can give you two guess qhy
[12:28:09 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> why*
[12:28:10 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> What are we doing about ALM in uP3?
[12:28:12 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> yup
[12:28:21 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> as a serious question?
[12:28:31 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I'm mainly ignoring it for now
[12:28:32 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> As tempting as it is to get rid of it, I'm not sure that's going to serve existing established ALM addicts well
[12:28:55 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> and banking on the experience and documentation of places like Chico that have done ALM -> DLM migrations
[12:29:07 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> did you save user layouts when you did that pberry?
[12:29:24 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> yeah. Maybe the thing to do is to hang loose and let that technology continue to mature
[12:29:54 EDT(-0400)] * pberry looks up
[12:30:04 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> yes
[12:30:13 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> we used awills import/export thing
[12:30:25 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> quite the useful little tool
[13:20:18 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> hello?
[13:20:39 EDT(-0400)] * jayshao (n=jayshao@jayshao.rutgers.edu) has joined ##uportal
[13:20:56 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> hmm.. magic disappearing IRC bug again?
[13:21:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> hey
[13:21:11 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> just no one around
[13:21:26 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> if a tree falls in the woods..
[13:21:51 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> interesting... at least I can see me chatting now...
[13:22:17 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> pberry - how goes your continuing uPortal saga?
[13:44:05 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> hey apetro_work_desk ... I'm doing the release documentation for 2.6.1-RC1 any tips on what wiki pages need to be updated?
[13:44:43 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> 2.6 needs a new child page
[13:44:55 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> yup
[13:44:55 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> the child page needs those cute Jira issue inclusions
[13:45:00 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> yup
[13:45:08 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> that's mostly it
[13:45:11 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> cool
[13:45:22 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I really like those jira inclusions
[13:45:41 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> there might be a wiki page somewhere about SVN tags. If there is, I probably forget to update it regularly.
[13:45:50 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> ok
[13:46:38 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> Those are nice. I hope I didn't come across as too short with the fellow asking again about that portlet deployment issue. It's the top known issue on the 2.6.0 page. I wish there were a way to make that a more effective way to communicate what is already known about a release.
[13:47:03 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I think just pushing on those release notes wiki pages
[13:47:22 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> do we have/want a jira inclusion for issues filed against a particular release?
[13:52:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> does the comment at the top of http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/UPC/2.6.0 need to be updated?
[14:05:44 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> EricDalquist I'm not sure I understand the question
[14:06:06 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> on the wiki pages for each release, the first jira inclusion is the issues known to affect the release, is that what you're talking about?
[14:06:40 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> And yes, the comment atop 2.6.0 needs updated. You on it or want me to do it?
[14:07:10 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> ***
[14:07:33 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> If everyone in this chat room, could please look to add value to the thread on jasig-discuss re: training Java developers, moving to Java
[14:07:37 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> that would be awesome
[14:07:52 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> I think we need to artificially make questions there successful for a while, to get momentum on that list.
[14:17:56 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> sorry ... got into a discussion here
[14:18:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I can do the update
[14:18:31 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I'm not sure I'm on that list :/
[14:22:44 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> aha – see, it's things like this that are keeping that list from being successful
[14:22:53 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk>
[14:24:08 EDT(-0400)] <lescour> what do you think about putting an extra link in releaseNotes.html to the wiki, in the Known Issues section?
[14:24:29 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> probably a good idea
[14:38:15 EDT(-0400)] <lescour> and if you really want to drive the point home, what about a tab on the guest layout for the wiki/release notes
[14:38:35 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> that would be even better
[14:38:56 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I might see if I can do that for 2.6.1
[14:39:21 EDT(-0400)] <lescour> i really liked being hit with the dlm manual first thing, in 2.6.0
[14:52:58 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> so on the 2.6.1 wiki page
[14:53:08 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> should I list issues that affect 2.6.0 & 2.6.1?
[14:53:17 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> since not all 2.6.0 issues a resolved in 2.6.1
[15:35:21 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> anyone awake?
[15:41:04 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> heh
[15:41:06 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> sort of?
[15:41:16 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> so ... working on release notes on the wiki
[15:41:33 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I'm thinking we keep the release notes to only featured issues or something like that
[15:41:38 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> and maybe have a link to "open issues"
[15:41:44 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> otherwise, there could be hundreds
[15:41:47 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> well right now we have the following pages:
[15:41:59 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> Overall 2.6 notes: http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/UPC/2.6
[15:42:23 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> 2.6.0 notes: http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/UPC/2.6.0 (with child pages for M1, RC1 & RC2)
[15:42:39 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> 2.6.1 notes: http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/UPC/2.6.1 (with child page for RC1)
[15:42:46 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> we don't want to overload with info
[15:43:03 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I don't think all the child pages are really necessary
[15:43:06 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> perhaps on the 2.6.1 page just link to the 2.6.0 page to check reported issues there?
[15:43:22 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I'd almost think we should do a recent first page for all the milestones culminating in a GA release
[15:43:26 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> kind of like a blog
[15:43:27 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> why not? We need release notes for ever package we release don't we?
[15:43:53 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> yeah, but most people aren't upgrading every milestone, so packing the notes together would make them more readable
[15:44:28 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> true
[15:44:47 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I also think including all the open issues is probably a mistake
[15:44:49 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> so one big page for 2.6.0 (M1, RC1, RC2, GA)
[15:44:58 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> and one big page for 2.6.1 (RC1, GA) ?
[15:45:05 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> that's what I'm thinking
[15:45:09 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> why is that?
[15:45:47 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> it's a long list, and most of the time what I'm interested in seeing is what's changed
[15:45:56 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> it's not going to change (in the whole) between releases
[15:46:06 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> hrm
[15:46:07 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I'd rather just link to an "outstanding issues" search in JIRA
[15:46:21 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> apetro_work_desk: you around to chime in on this?
[15:46:32 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> maybe highlight things like the Netbeans issue that have known workarounds
[15:46:51 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> the nice thing about the jira inclusion it is very minimal effort
[15:47:14 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> but I suppose updates to the notes for 'big' issues could be reasonable
[15:48:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I really lean towards the simpler solution being better, just having the 'issues that affect this release' inclusion is nice and simple from a maintaining documentation perspective
[15:49:58 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I'd just be concerned about overwhelming some poor guy reading it
[15:50:03 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> it's easy, but is it useful?
[15:50:37 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> perhaps a jira inclusion of critical and major issues and a link to all issues?
[15:50:52 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> how many critical and major issues are there?
[15:50:57 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> for 2.6.0 that would be 2 issues
[15:51:07 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> 1 critical is the initportal bug
[15:51:20 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> 1 major is a ALM cyclical reference bug
[15:51:24 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> well, that doesn't include all the ones that haven't been fixed but have previous versions listed
[15:51:38 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> ?
[15:51:41 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> unless we want to get rigorous about updating the versions effected everytime we cut a release?
[15:51:53 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> some issue that has affects: 2.5.2 but hasn't been fixed
[15:52:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> ah
[15:52:07 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> yeah
[15:52:13 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I don't think we're going to get a perfect solution
[15:52:26 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> shrug
[15:52:32 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I can settle for imperfection
[15:52:41 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> just looking for some tips on what I can get done in the next 30 minutes with these release notes
[15:53:05 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I'd be happy with a little text description of "big changes" and links to JIRA for everything else
[15:53:13 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> and others can fill in if they want more detail
[15:53:51 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> I think the child pages are REALLY necessary. 1:1 mapping of tagged release to page with auto-generated release notes.
[15:54:00 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> I think there should be a 2.6.1 RC1 page
[15:54:04 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> distinct from a 2.6.1 page
[15:54:13 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> there is at this point
[15:54:16 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> I think these should each have their own versions tags in Jira
[15:54:21 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> really annoying if you're a deployer only upgrading GAs
[15:54:25 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I think my original question is what to do with the Jira includes on the 2.6 page
[15:54:29 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> and then I think we should leverage Jira to auto-generate these
[15:54:36 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> I think there should be a 2.6 roll-up page
[15:54:41 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> that's the page
[15:54:41 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> also – annoying in JIRA if you're trying to find out what was in a GA tag – since it generally includes previous milestones
[15:54:51 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> with the human-generated high level discussion of the release
[15:55:01 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> It's annoying but it effectively models reality
[15:55:03 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> or, we could mark fixeds in both the M/RC and the GA
[15:55:22 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> except that we generally don't make say binary downloads of M/RC tags available for the "public"
[15:56:19 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> yeah, but modeling the reality of what is in them is still valuable
[15:56:25 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> look, if it's actually annoying
[15:56:35 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> that the 2.6.1 release notes page
[15:56:40 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> won't automatically aggregate
[15:56:49 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> issues fixed in RC1 and issues fixed in 2.6.1 GA
[15:56:53 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> then someone (possibly me)
[15:57:00 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> should spend five minutes building the Yahoo Pipe
[15:57:01 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> that does this
[15:57:07 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> heh
[15:57:10 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> Since Jira is too stupid to do this query
[15:57:16 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> and then we'll all get what we want
[15:57:20 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> Jira models reality
[15:57:21 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> jira can do the queries
[15:57:23 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> maybe – I'm leery about going convoluted on the wiki pages
[15:57:27 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> JIRA can model reality
[15:57:29 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I can live with that
[15:57:37 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> but I think the Wiki release notes are for deployer convenience
[15:57:41 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I'm just wondering about what the queries are that we want on each page
[15:57:46 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> and should be a little more policshed from that perspective
[15:57:46 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> I figure Yahoo pipes would be the most stable piece of our infrastructure yet.
[15:58:11 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> I think there should be "Issues known to affect this release"
[15:58:22 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> and yes, we have a problem that not all issues that actually affect the release are properly tagged
[15:58:34 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> and I think there should be "Issues resolved in this release"
[15:58:40 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I agree
[15:58:50 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> which we can make the aggregate of issues resolved on the way to release, via a Yahoo pipe merge or otherwise, if that's desirable
[15:59:18 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> for "issues known to affect this release" do we just select issues that are tagged as affecting version X or issues that affect W & X
[15:59:34 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> or should issues still open on W be updated to include X in affected
[15:59:41 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> none of this is terribly difficult
[15:59:48 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> Issues that affect X should be tagged as affecting X
[15:59:51 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> but having one way of doing it is what needed
[15:59:52 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> ok
[16:00:00 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> if they also happen to affect W, they should be tagged as affecting W too
[16:00:19 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> then should we start being better about updating jira issues as we create/release versions in that tool?
[16:00:25 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> this has the nice consequence that the simple Jira query of "Show me all issues that affect X" will, well, show me all issues that affect X
[16:00:29 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> Yes.
[16:00:34 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> apetro_work_desk didn't just call JIRA 'stupid' ... did he?
[16:00:50 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> ie, when I create version 2.6.1 should I go and update all open issues on 2.6.0 to also affect 2.6.1
[16:00:53 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> I think I did, yes
[16:01:02 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> blasphemy...
[16:01:08 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> the search creation engine doesn't have all the power I would like, i.e. AND, OR, and NOT
[16:01:08 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> I will not stand for it
[16:01:26 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> EricDalquist , yes, that's exactly right
[16:01:34 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> sounds great
[16:01:39 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> all bugs that affected 2.6.0 that aren't fixed presumably affect 2.6.1
[16:01:47 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I'm going to continue chugging through theses release notes pages
[16:01:52 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> issues that aren't bugs, of course, don't affect any version.
[16:01:54 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I think that's what Sakai does
[16:01:56 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I'm tracking what I do to cut the release to document that
[16:02:07 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> they do a bulk change of all issues to update the unfixed ones to bump another revision in
[16:02:10 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> and I'm also going to add some documentation regarding release management in jira
[16:02:13 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> documenting is good. That script I sent you help any?
[16:02:18 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> yeah
[16:02:23 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> created a very nice little .zip
[16:02:42 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I really need to find a week to just go through and do some confluence pruning
[16:02:57 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> We hashed this out on the list not so long ago, about the affects-versions and so forth.
[16:03:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I did find a page of SVN tags in confluence .... imho we really don't need to duplicate that data
[16:03:05 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I thought we had
[16:03:09 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> And one point that seems pretty important to me is that we have too many open issues.
[16:03:16 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> http://twitter.com/chicoportal
[16:03:19 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> yes we do
[16:03:19 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> I couldn't resist
[16:03:51 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> and many of them are so old they aren't valid
[16:03:59 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> we could always prune issues as "inactive" or something like that
[16:04:03 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> it's odd. Doing this BCCampus gig, like, that one ALM fix by eandresan, a nice fix, languished for two years as an attachment in Jira with no merging into the code?
[16:04:05 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> one of the few Sakai practices I like
[16:04:09 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> too many missed opportunities here.
[16:04:20 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> now that I'm back on the trunk I'm slowly getting into getting this clean up
[16:04:29 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk>
[16:04:31 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> welcome back
[16:04:33 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> a big problem is we went almost 6 months with no email notifications from Jira
[16:04:40 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> so a lot of issues and fixes were ignored by the developers
[16:04:48 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I try to watch the JIRA update RSS but the volume'es a bit hi
[16:04:51 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> heh. I'm subscribed to the RSS
[16:04:56 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> I still ignored some.
[16:05:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I wonder at times if we should have the uPortal jira notifications sent to the uportal-dev list
[16:05:07 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> just so people pay attention
[16:05:12 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> so we can ignore them there?
[16:05:18 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> indeed
[16:05:29 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> what if we had a default owner in a dispatcher role?
[16:05:44 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> there would be a rash of "e-mail bankruptcy" declared
[16:06:09 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> that would be nice
[16:06:17 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> we talked in the past about getting serious about component owners
[16:06:19 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> that would help
[16:06:25 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> new issue created --> assigned to dispatcher --> dispatcher reviews his inbox of issues, dispatches them to devs or to an "unassigned" state that actually reflects that no one cares enough to do anything
[16:06:53 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> we can't magically get people to do work, is the thing
[16:07:06 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> yup
[16:07:18 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> visibility of available high ROI issues gets a little more important with Unicon's ever so beautiful "Cooperative Support" model
[16:07:35 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> subscribers vote on bugs, whatever's got the most votes Unicon tries to work on, reports happy progress back to subscribers
[16:07:50 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> well, they're not going to vote for an issue they don't know about
[16:08:58 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> working on demonstrating some actual momentum there. Currently I / we have fixed some bugs, addressed some issues under the auspices of this program, but the marketing messaging hasn't caught up.
[16:09:58 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> we're on a good path, though. Address the upgrade path issue, get people on the upgrade treadmill, regularly upgrading releases
[16:10:08 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> and the value proposition of reporting and fixing issues goes way up
[16:10:13 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> yup
[16:11:11 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> so on the 2.6 overview page
[16:11:25 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> any ideas what should be there?
[16:11:36 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> since that page isn't associated with any particular release
[16:12:22 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> hmmm... I wonder if that page shouldn't exist?
[16:12:39 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> if between the release strategy and the 2.6.0 page we have it covered
[16:13:38 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> 2.6 should have the high level bullet points from 2.6.0
[16:13:45 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> and 2.6.1?
[16:13:50 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> and 2.6.0 should be de-featured to reference 2.6 for the high level bullets
[16:14:03 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> 2.6 becomes the umbrella marketing page for the 2.6.x line
[16:14:10 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> which largely today has all the major features it will ever have
[16:14:16 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> so move the "High level discussion of uPortal 2.6.0" section from the 2.6.0 page to the 2.6 page?
[16:14:19 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> so we can start documenting out how wonderful they are
[16:14:22 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> Exactly.
[16:14:26 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> sounds good
[16:15:19 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> It might be worth getting it so an of the 2.6 overview looks good in a box or so on the particular release pages, so people are more likely to be aware it's around, and to make it easier to re-use its markety goodness across the particular release notes pages
[16:15:54 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> yeah
[16:16:29 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> sound sane to you jayshao?
[16:16:59 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> so this is what I have for an outline:
[16:17:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> Minor release page
[16:17:02 EDT(-0400)]

<EricDalquist> -good

Unknown macro: {exerpt}

[16:17:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> -section for each GA patch release
[16:17:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> --Link to release details page
[16:17:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> --High level bullet points of features & fixes
[16:17:02 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> Release details page
[16:17:04 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> -note/tip of message to lists
[16:17:06 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> -Jira reports
[16:17:08 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> --Issues affecting the release
[16:17:10 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> --Issues fixed in the release
[16:17:30 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> sounds great
[16:17:36 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> nice post on jasig-discuss jayshao
[16:21:31 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> just got back
[16:22:12 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> sounds good to me
[16:22:43 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> well, we got 2 posts on that thread, anyway
[16:22:54 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> indeed
[16:23:06 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> oh, by the way apetro_work_desk - Bill forwarded your post around to Rutgers java dev list as pointers to resources
[16:23:08 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> and Jonathan had a nice cross-post that was very clear about where to discuss this
[16:23:10 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/UPC/2.6
[16:23:21 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> take a peak at an initial re-do of that page
[16:25:02 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> Excellent. It's a good division of labor. I can write the lucid list posts, Eric can do the work requiring actual technical virtuosity, Bill can liaise with the board, and Jason can get Sakai to build. Roles for everyone.
[16:27:19 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> my open-ended musings on what could go into a 2.6 release, at the bottom, need to go elsewhere
[16:27:22 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> or just be deleted
[16:27:26 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> ok
[16:27:36 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I think they can probably be removed
[16:27:50 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> sounds good. I can re-generate random musings any time we decide they're needed again.

[16:28:10 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> one of these releases we'll go after Sakai integration...
[16:28:27 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> "integration?"
[16:28:31 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> hit reload
[16:29:00 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> still need to make an excerpt section
[16:29:06 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> but I think that works fairly well
[16:29:19 EDT(-0400)] <apetro_work_desk> looks very good.
[17:04:36 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> Sakai integration is maybe on my roadmap for the next 6 months
[17:04:38 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> hrm
[17:04:40 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> so
[17:04:51 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> in the bulk-change workflow in jira
[17:05:00 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> if I change the affects version
[17:05:09 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> that is going to set it to X
[17:05:14 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> depends on the usual budget-approval shenanigans
[17:05:15 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> instead of adding X as another affects
[17:05:31 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> hmmm...
[17:05:47 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> since I don't want to remove existing affects entries
[17:05:52 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> just add a new one
[17:05:56 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> wonder how Peter does it for Sakai then? I hope he doesn't go through them by hand...
[17:07:25 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> http://www.ja-sig.org/issues/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=10020&version=10492&sorter/field=priority&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=fixVersions&sorter/order=ASC&sorter/field=versions&sorter/order=ASC
[17:07:39 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> like how to I make sure 2.6.1 RC1 is listed for all of those
[17:09:11 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> do you have access to Peter to ask him?
[17:32:41 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I don't see him online
[17:32:45 EDT(-0400)] <jayshao> I can shoot him an emial
[17:32:51 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> that would be great
[17:32:58 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I just did it issue by issue for 2.6.1-RC1
[17:33:00 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> and it was a pain
[17:33:10 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> I couldn't imagine doing more than a handfull
[17:36:19 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> not that the systems folks need even more to do, but JIRA is up to 3.10.2 (with a pre-release of 3.11). The new project roles are a very cool feature
[17:36:26 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> not sure how useful they are to JA-SIG
[17:36:41 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> heh, well it would likely be me doing the upgrade
[17:36:49 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> at this point it will probably wait until we move to the new box
[17:36:52 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> whenever that is ready
[17:37:00 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> have you done a JIRA upgrade before?
[17:37:24 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> a few times
[17:45:45 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> it took me a while to get used to their preferred method
[17:46:10 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> dump, create new db, install fresh war, start, load?
[17:47:19 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> yeah
[17:47:25 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> it's not what we typically do here
[17:47:48 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> there are a lot of manual steps in that "install fresh war" phase

[17:47:52 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> mostly plugins
[17:47:56 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> ah yeah
[17:48:27 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> but I've got it down now
[17:48:47 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> I can't wait to migrate Confluence to newer hardware
[17:50:31 EDT(-0400)] <EricDalquist> night all
[18:10:43 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> and now it's back to html nerds
[18:11:04 EDT(-0400)] <pberry> Welcome, the topic today is divs. Are you using too many?
[20:20:22 EDT(-0400)] * jayshao (n=jayshao@pool-72-79-113-152.nwrknj.east.verizon.net) has joined ##uportal
[22:14:21 EDT(-0400)] * jayshao (n=jayshao@pool-72-79-113-152.nwrknj.east.verizon.net) has joined ##uportal

Browser not supported