|Re: [higgins-dev] Another bug fix for the 1.0 branch.|
I believe it meets criteria #4: "Bugs that cause a "major" feature to not function and there is no workaround available to accomplish the same task." Without this fix, one of our Novell products that is using the 1.0.0 branch will not be able to sign tokens with a certificate that is different than the IDP STS SSL certificate. This is an important feature they are depending on.
As to a release date for 1.0.2, I'm not so concerned about that as I am with just getting it checked in so that it will be in the next build, whenever that may be. As I mentioned, I do my own builds of the code. I just want this fix to be "officially" in the checked in code base.
I'll update the defect to show a target milestone of 1.0.2.
Based on this, am I ok to go ahead and check in the fix to the B-1-0-0 branch?
>>> brian walker <bwalker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 5/5/2008 1:06 PM >>>
hi Dan - couple of quick feedback points:
1. Was your sense that this fix matches the "P1" level criteria to be included in 1.0.0 branch based the high level criteria noted in the following link?
2. Presuming the answer to above you feel is yes, then we should place it in the 1.0.2 release (vs. 1.1 M2) as this would be the next scheduled patch release for the 1.0.0 branch. We currently do not have a targeted release date yet for 1.0.2 - so please let me know if there is some timing sensitivity around this proposed bug fix.
On May 5, 2008, at 1:22 PM, Daniel Sanders wrote: