Right +1 from me as noted in [1]. Indeed I did comment about maintenance releases needing to be binary compatible without new features as Apache guidelines note. In this case, I am happy to let the release manager make the call. I am also happy with the XP "release early, release often." I think that as long as we document what we are doing in this case, and why, in the release notes, we should be ok. These release number guidelines are important and perhaps it is OK in this case if we can guarantee that nothing will break previous 1.3.x releases (1.3, 1.3.1). It sure does not seem that this should not break anything unless someone is compiling code and has deprecation usage configured as a compile error! Yikes. I think you can do that in Eclipse...
Thank you, Gary > -----Original Message----- > From: Rahul Akolkar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 8:45 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [RESULT] 3rd attempt: Release commons-io 1.3.2 > > On 6/19/07, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Here's the result of the vote: > > > > +1: Sebb, Oliver, Niall, Ben, Myself > <snip/> > > And +1 from Gary in another thread [1] -- though in a subsequent post > in the same thread he does express some interest in having the version > number be 1.4. > > > > -1: Stephen > > > > No votes from Henri and Dion. > > > > My understanding is, that Stephen's vote isn't counted as a veto, but > > I'd like to ask you to correct me, if I'm wrong. In which case the > > vote had failed. > > > <snap/> > > Correct, it isn't a veto. In this case, it is upto you (being the RM) > to decide whether to go ahead with putting the bits on the mirrors > etc. since you have the required votes. > > I did not understand your comment about the version number [2] as it > relates to whether deprecations should preclude release++ from being a > point release. Regardless of what you choose to do here, we should > (collectively) form an opinion and clarify this in the versioning > guide for future reference. I am of the opinion that it shouldn't be a > point release. > > -Rahul > > [1] http://www.nabble.com/RE%3A-Still-no-votes%21-%28WAS%3A--VOTE--3rd- > attempt%3A-Release-commons-io-1.3.2%29-p11091530.html > > [2] http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Still-no-votes%21-%28WAS%3A--VOTE--3rd- > attempt%3A-Release-commons-io-1.3.2%29-p11093009.html > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jochen > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
