Re: [epf-dev] Triage on bugs assigned to 1.0.0.

[Ana Valente Pereira <apereira@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I understand ... but I think that when in met in February we dis not 
realize that there are almost 50 bugs to solve ... most of them involve 
adding new content ... we can try to make an effort but I think that it 
would be almost impossible to resolve 2 bugs per day in m7... for 1.0 I 
would like to finish the review that you made on PM (to match with what 
was done for the other disciplines) ...pending for so long  but we may 
have to de-scope some content ...such as content from the XP plug-in?

or we may discuss this on the call on monday?

Ana

Jim Ruehlin wrote:

> We may want to reconsider where to reassign those PM bugs. They both
> involve creating new content. At the February committers meeting we
> discussed trying not to add new content after M7 (C2), so we can use M8
> (C3) for fixes and M9 (T1) for enablement.
>
>
>
> We may want to reassess the decision to avoid adding new content, or
> consider moving more content into the 1.0.1 release. Does anyone have an
> opinion?
>
>
>
> - Jim
>
>
>
> ____________________
>
> Jim Ruehlin, IBM Rational
>
> RUP Content Developer
>
> Eclipse Process Framework (EPF) Committer www.eclipse.org/epf
>
> email:   jruehlin@xxxxxxxxxx
>
> phone:  760.505.3232
>
> fax:      949.369.0720
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Ana Valente Pereira <apereira@xxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:Ana Valente
> Pereira <apereira@xxxxxxxxxxx>] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 12:58 PM
> To: Jim Ruehlin/Irvine/IBM
> Cc: Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List
> Subject: Re: [epf-dev] Triage on bugs assigned to 1.0.0.
>
>
>
> According to the plan I sent today I would like to propose moving 
> 146476 to M8 and 171122 to M9 (together with other XP content bugs) 
>
> thanks 
>
> Ana 
>
>  
>
> > Move to M7 (C2) 
> >
> > PM 
> >
> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=146476 
> >
> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=171122 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >    
>
>