Rick Hillegas wrote:
Andrew McIntyre wrote:
On 9/29/06, Rick Hillegas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First the good news:
1) So far, no one has found any showstopping runtime problems with the
product itself.
Yay!
Would it be useful to do the following:
A) Post a new release candidate but don't call a vote yet. Just let the
existing vote continue.
B) Ask the structure experts to scrutinize the new candidate carefully.
C) Call a new vote only after the structure experts are satisfied.
I think enough changes have accumulated that we may need a 10.2.1.6.
Just removing junit.jar was a small enough change that I felt
rerolling all the distributions from scratch wouldn't be needed, now
I'm not so sure. So how about:
* roll a 10.2.1.5-and-a-half, we get today and the rest of the weekend
to poke at the new structure and such.
* Merge the two or three recent doc changes that have gone in since
10.2.1.5 that haven't already been merged over. I can take care of
that today, since I committed them to trunk.
* Monday, roll 10.2.1.6. Call for a 3-day vote closes 5pm PDT. Should
be fine, since the difference between 10.2.1.5 and 10.2.1.6 code-wise
is very minimal and shouldn't need extensive testing, more of just a
sanity check.
sound good?
andrew
Thanks, Andrew. I'm happy with this solution.
Regards,
-Rick
Hi Rick,
Will DERBY-1900 be also addressed in 10.2.1.6 ? This will avoid users to
manually change permissions on the scripts before running them.
In the thread
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Questions-on-the-scripts-in--bin-directory-of-Derby-install-p6272490.html
Andrew had a question about which platform are these distributions built
on, maybe the solution
to DERBY-1900 lies there.
-Rajesh
