[Lazarus] Linux Journal article

[Andrew Brunner]

On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Vincent
Snijders<vsnijders at vodafonevast.nl> wrote:
> I fear I cannot follow you. Since two months or so, we want to make a
> release. We have identified critical bugs and regressions that we want to
> resolve before the release and marked them with the 0.9.28 target. Do you
> say we should start a release anyway, even if it these critical issue have
> not been fixed? What do you mean by "kick off".

The bug tracking software would need to include a flag for a bug that
would cause the build process to be blocked.  Critical bugs are not
ones that can be carried over to the next release.  A "Stop-Release"
flag are from flaws that cause data corruption or crashes in the IDE,
or any others that someone else can suggest here.

>> Bug tracking should be able to report all critical flaws and be
>> cleared out by the community.  Could actually speed things along if
>> you think about it.
>>
> Goto http://bugs.freepascal.org/view_all_bug_page.php, select the Lazarus
> project and choose the "target 0.9.28" filter/

I see a "Major" tag assigned to a scroll key getting stuck.  To me,
this is not "Stop-Release" kind of bug but it is listed as a Major
flaw.  While this flaw was marked as "Major" it should never be
flagged as a "Stop-Release" flag.

> Please, provide patches for the remaining 10 0.9.28 issues and we start
> release building tomorrow.

I am going to help pound out a few of those bugs.  But I think before
I start I would like to know my efforts are being applied to a
concerted endeavor.  So, how difficult would it be to examine all of
those issues and sift through them, assigning a "Stop-Release" flag to
them.  Certianly, an interim release would not have to have all bugs
resolved... Just the "Stop-Release" ones.

Q: Out of all outstanding bugs... How many would be "Stop-Release" flagged ?