[dev] New release question

[Brent J. Nordquist]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Chuck Hagenbuch <chuck@horde.org> wrote:

> I'm not clear, based on our previous discussions about release
> engineering, whether or not we are going to make sure that IMP 3.1 works
> with Horde 2.0.
> 
> Doing so would mean we were adhering a bit more to our API and backwards
> compatibility.

That was the overall sense I came away with; that as of Horde 2.0 we would
stop rev'ving Horde unless its API had really changed, and conversely,
wouldn't require a new rev of a Horde app. to use the new rev. of Horde
unless it really needed something from the new Horde rev's new API.

> However, the new releases of Nag and Kronolith would only work with
> Horde 2.1, and I think that might be confusing to people... I need to
> upgrade Horde for Nag but not for IMP? etc...

I don't find it confusing, myself; I think that's the natural (and
desirable) result.  I hope we could clear up any confusion for the users
by having a web page that showed what each app needs from Horde:

	IMP 3.0 requires Horde 2.0 or greater
	IMP 3.1 requires Horde 2.0 or greater
	Kronolith 1.0 requires Horde 2.1 or greater
	(etc.)

So I guess the real kicker is:  how much work would be required (and are
we willing to invest) for IMP 3.1 and Turba 1.1 to work fine with both
Horde 2.0 and 2.1?  If it's minimal, I think we should do it.  It would 
save sites that don't intend to deploy Kronolith/Nag from having to change 
their Horde at all when they upgrade to IMP 3.1/Turba 1.1 and I think that 
would be cool too.

-- 
Brent J. Nordquist <bjn@horde.org> N0BJN       / OPN: #horde
Yahoo!: Brent_Nordquist / AIM: BrentJNordquist / ICQ: 76158942



>From chuck@horde.org Date: Wed,  6 Mar 2002 13:16:53 -0500
Return-Path: <chuck@horde.org>
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lists.horde.org; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lists.horde.org
Received: (qmail 24378 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2002 18:17:33 -0000
Received: from h00104bc60b3c.ne.mediaone.net (HELO marina.horde.org) (24.91.196.127)
  by clark.horde.org with SMTP; 6 Mar 2002 18:17:33 -0000
Received: by marina.horde.org (Postfix, from userid 33)
	id 6065E39B0; Wed,  6 Mar 2002 13:16:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from 192.168.0.116 ( [192.168.0.116])
	as user chuck@localhost by marina.horde.org with HTTP;
	Wed,  6 Mar 2002 13:16:53 -0500
Message-ID: <1015438613.3c865d1535493@marina.horde.org>
Date: Wed,  6 Mar 2002 13:16:53 -0500
From: Chuck Hagenbuch <chuck@horde.org>
To: dev@lists.horde.org
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0203061151410.16602-100000@kepler.acns.bethel.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0203061151410.16602-100000@kepler.acns.bethel.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 4.0-cvs
Subject: Re: [dev] New release question

Quoting "Brent J. Nordquist" <bjn@horde.org>:

> So I guess the real kicker is:  how much work would be required (and are
> we willing to invest) for IMP 3.1 and Turba 1.1 to work fine with both
> Horde 2.0 and 2.1?  If it's minimal, I think we should do it.  It would 
> save sites that don't intend to deploy Kronolith/Nag from having to change 
> their Horde at all when they upgrade to IMP 3.1/Turba 1.1 and I think that 
> would be cool too.

I don't know about minimal; it means more care when merging changes and a lot 
of testing. IRC party for merging/testing/bugfixing tomorrow, Friday, and over 
the weekend? :)

-chuck

--
Charles Hagenbuch, <chuck@horde.org>
"A dream which helps you to live your reality with dignity
 and justice is a good dream." - Tariq Ramadan