I will just call it 1.5.0 to be on the safe side.. not more discussion needed :)
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm looking at a git log between 1.4.0 and HEAD, and from what I see, > there are a few improvements that could be translated as either > features/improvements or bugs. > > A few tweaks on the wording could change them into either bug or fix... e.g: > > Reloading Divert Support - Feature, > Diverts are not reloaded = Bug > > > > The only real feature I could find so far was your commit here: > > > commit 9163c679ef21e70ba94f54c9a1bed9a12ad6bcca > Author: John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> > Date: Sun Jul 31 22:12:50 2016 -0400 > ARTEMIS-756 introduce CDI based integration for Artemis. Includes > integration tests on both Weld and OWB. > > > > If you'd like I can call it 1.5.0 based on this change. it's up to you > really since it's your commit. WDYT? > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:09 AM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: >> Is there a changelog of whats going in? If its all bug fixes, 1.4.1 makes >> sense. if its feature, I would think 1.5.0 is more appropriate. >> >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:52 AM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I want to make a release early next week. (as I have pointed a few weeks >>> ago). >>> >>> >>> I will release from master... there are a few new packages added >>> around OSGI, but I was still considering calling 1.4.1, and reserve >>> 1.5.0 for a few more major features that will change the broker >>> itself. >>> >>> >>> If no objections I will call it 1.4.1, but I wouldn't mind calling it >>> 1.5.0 if anyone objects. >>> > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic -- Clebert Suconic
