and I just removed the 2.x branch On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 8:20 AM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Let’s do this as 2.x then? Probably 2.27. I’m cutting 2.26 today. > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 10:33 AM Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On the logging bit, I would note there are numerous cases of 2.x >> releases adjusting stuff in ways that similarly needed specific >> handling 'during a normal upgrade procedure' per >> https://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/latest/versions.html. >> Even the existing logging bits have clearly had multiple cases of >> small upgrade adjustments being required. The handling that would be >> needed this time is pretty trivial (create a provided properties file, >> only if bringing all old broker config files along as-is and not >> 'creating' a new broker instance) and so really along very similar >> lines to those prior instances. >> >> On Fri, 16 Sept 2022 at 16:05, Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> > In my opinion there is a bit of more work to do before 3.0 could be >> > released. For example: >> > >> > - Remove all deprecated methods, config, etc. (this is not a small amount >> > of work) >> > - Update all the config with the new inclusive terms >> > >> > Personally I don't really see how we could do the logging change on 2.x as >> > it's a breaking change. Folks won't be able to follow the normal upgrade >> > procedure [1] since it will break their logging configuration. >> > >> > I also think that anything we want to remove in 3.0 should be deprecated >> > for at least 1 release of 2.x. >> > >> > >> > Justin >> > >> > [1] >> > https://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/latest/upgrading.html >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 8:43 AM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > hmmm... this is actually pointless.. (the 2.x branch so far). >> > > >> > > >> > > I had to cherry-pick *everything* except to 1 commit: >> > > >> > > ARTEMIS-3987Removing ActiveMQ Artemis Rest from the codebase - commit >> > > e654eba >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > We could definitely release from main right now... >> > > >> > > >> > > and I'm wondering if we shouldn't make the logging change on a 2.x >> > > branch.... I don't see much else beyond logging to warrant a 3.x >> > > branch (we can certainly make a plan for a 3.x and we could / should >> > > start working on it). >> > > >> > > >> > > What do you think? >> > > >> > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 4:41 PM Clebert Suconic >> > > <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > @Gary Tully unless you don't consider removing activemq-rest and >> > > > changing the logging framework a change big enough to warrant a bump >> > > > to 3.0. if the consensus is to keep main as 2.x we can certainly >> > > > rename it back and do the release from main. I thought we should >> > > > rename it based on these two things. >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 11:22 AM Clebert Suconic >> > > > <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > maini is already 3.0... removed Rest, and soon the logging change >> > > > > will >> > > > > be put it in there... If I release from main now, it will be called >> > > > > 3.0, and we will have to do a 4.0 when we bring in the logging >> > > > > changes. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > So, I would rather cherry-pick stuff into 2.x >> > > > > >> > > > > (I will go ahead and remove 2.25.x now) >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 8:46 AM Gary Tully <gary.tu...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > would it make sense to just cut 2.26.0 from main? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, 14 Sept 2022 at 02:11, Clebert Suconic >> > > > > > <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I am renaming the branch as 2.x (instead of 2.25.x). >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Some of the candidates to cherry-pick categorize it as an >> > > enhancement, >> > > > > > > so it would make the release next week to be named 2.26.0 instead >> > > of >> > > > > > > 2.25.1) (same branch, just promoting it to 2.26 due to an >> > > enhancement >> > > > > > > being part of it). >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > for that reason I am pushing a 2.x branch and I will remove the >> > > 2.25.x >> > > > > > > branch (after a few days). >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 11:40 AM Clebert Suconic >> > > > > > > <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I would like to do a 2.25.1 next week (monday or tuesday). >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Please add any commits into 2.25.x (just pushed a new >> > > > > > > > branch)... >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > please use cherry-pick -x on commits from main only. (git >> > > cherry-pick >> > > > > > > > -x <commit-id>) >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > > Clebert Suconic >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > Clebert Suconic >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > -- >> > > > > Clebert Suconic >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Clebert Suconic >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Clebert Suconic >> > > >> > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic
-- Clebert Suconic
