Hi all,

I think the same way as Claus. We should try to not add any functional changes 
a few days before a release. That is the only way to make sure people have time 
to run their tests against the code base to be released.
I was already hesitant to commit my patch for the servlet on friday. 

So I think we have two options for the features.xml issue. If it is really 
important for 2.7.0 we do a new release with it included in some days. If not 
we cut a release now with the reverted version, perhaps with Willems fixes.

So I think what we should do is define a code freeze some days before a 
release. During this time we should only commit bug fixes but not functional 
changes. In a less formal way we already do this.
If we think this could slow down progress on the trunk then we could at this 
point create a branch for the release. 

Christian

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Claus Ibsen [mailto:claus.ib...@gmail.com] 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. März 2011 11:44
An: dev@camel.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Camel 2.7.0

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I see now that Willem already reverted the patch, not clear why, I assume 
> just based on your feelings. I would be very interested in seeing Guillaume's 
> opinion, as a Karaf/OSGi expert.
>

I really dont understand why you would think its "no brainer" to make such a 
big change "seconds" before you cut the release.
You are usually very good and careful when you do the releases.

The ticket its not a blocker for the 2.7 release. And it was already scheduled 
for Camel 2.8.
And in terms of OSGi you have to be extra careful and test it more thoroughly 
than a simpler fix in a plain Camel component.
The OSGi tests runs at the end of the CI process and thus they are more prone 
to not be run due test failures in pre-existing components.
We all know it can be a little tricky to have CI 100% green.
Hence its a good practice to also run those OSGi tests locally once in a while 
to ensure it works well.


Reply via email to