As far as [io] is concerned, I'm hoping to submit a patch or two this week, mostly focusing on improving the test coverage and simplifying the api. Since Jeremias is on vacation for 2 weeks or so, if any committers would keep their ears to the ground and take a look at my patches I would appreciate it.
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Well, we want a release that works, so if that means waiting then thats how it goes. Don't want to miss the boat on any books or articles or other stuff though.
I'm marshalling [collections] hoping for a release soon. Perhaps if [lang] committers want something to do, the reflect code could be broken out into a sandbox [reflect]? Or the [lang] sandbox could be used. Or there could be a focus on [io].
I don't want to wait too long though, as [lang] feels like it might have the energy to get a 2.1 in a couple of months to fill in any 2.0 gaps. Also, I want to use [lang] at work!
Stephen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Henri Yandell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
batchIn addition to the question of us playing it a bit more by the rules, the Jakarta website is in a bit of a transition for a week or so. I'd rather not do any deploys until the move from daedelus to minotaur is complete, so am suggesting we back off until then. This sound doable?
Hen
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, Gary Gregory wrote:
I'll take the blame for causing any confusion on this one since I had
committed these Javadoc changes "during" the vote, which was made more
difficult due to the extremely long email delays caused by the current
beneficial toof viruses going 'round.
My thought was that we were indeed voting on the build based on tagged
sources and that any new commits would be in a post >2.0 release (even
though, these changes being Javadoc changes are "harmless" and
freezethe release IMHO ;-)
If we want to implement a code freeze in our environment on top of using tags, we could do that. I guess we'd have to vote on it too :-)
Gary
-----Original Message----- From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 00:00 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release of Commons Lang 2.0 [take 2]
Well, if there is a question about policy/process, why not just
Release. Ithe
code and restart the vote?By tagging the CVS, he effectively has frozen the code for the
arewas simply curious about the policy because, as I said, other projects
alpha.stricter. For example the HTTPd team has different rules (http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html).
A Release Manager makes a release build, and it is automatically an
betaIt becomes a beta release when at least three Committers have voted
atstatus, and there are more +1 than -1. It becomes a GA release when
+1least three Committers vote for GA (stable) status, and there are more
packagethan -1. Notice that -1 is not a veto. Notice, also, that the
changes.itself may go through multiple status changes, but no packaging
inThe only allowable change is renaming the file to reflect the change
tarballstatus; exceptions can be made if a change in the contents of the
change in(e.g., someone forgot to add the LICENSE file). Otherwise, if a
as athe CVS needs to be incorporated, it becomes a new release (with a new vote).
Other projects, such as Avalon, also roll jars and then vote on them
policyRelease. So I was just asking to understand what is established as
here. I wasn't challenging Henri's release.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]