Hello,
see inline.
Am Tue, 26 Apr 2016 18:05:01 -0400
schrieb Josh Elser<els...@apache.org>:
Thanks for the great details, Bernd. Some questions/comments:
I hadn't even stumbled across VFS-570 due to its lack of
fixVersion=2.1. Are there more that need to be correctly tagged which
could potentially block the release of 2.1?
I did not waste much time in setting/unsetting the fixversion. I
modified some severities and closed some. But the blocker bugs (the
ones I considered) are all closed.
You could do a mass change on the existing bugs, but I am sure that
causes some discussion and especially people setting the fields back to
their preferences (at least that happend a few times in the past).
I'll make sure to avoid the spam when closing all the issues currently
fixVersion=2.1.
I'm not sure I follow you about the concern of using
maven-release-plugin with a multi-module maven project. This works
just fine (@see other Apache maven projects I'm involved in). If
there are demons laying in wait, I can knock them out as I find them.
Well yes, I use the release plugin aswell (in fact I did a company
internal release of VFS 2.1 with it already). I think it was also used
for the 2.0 release. But there are some things (especially the tagging
of the SVN and the tag in the POM) which is currently not very
preferable in apache commons I think. I would not use it for a release
(especially as rolling back and revovering would be painful). But I
agreee with you, it should work.
Are there instructions on running clirr? I'm not familiar with the
tool (and I don't see any configuration in the top-level pom.xml).
You can run the "mvn -Psandbox clean site" build (possibly follwoed by
a site tst deploy). The clirr report is part of it. I had a site build
from the snapshot on people.apache.org, but I havent checked if/how the
new server would look like. So currently you need to run it locally.
Thanks! Very helpful.
Do you have the karma to make a 2.2 version on JIRA? That'd be a nice
help to start moving stuff out of 2.1 (as well as make sure things
sitting in Patch Available don't get forgotten).
Yes, seems like I can do it. I created 2.2.
Thank you!
I would lean towards
the side of only putting bug-fixes into a 2.1.1 and preferring
towards any new features/changes into a 2.2 (to closer follow the
definition of semver). We presently have 3 major and 1 minor version
unresolved for fixVersion=2.1 -- these where the issues I previously
referred to that I felt OK bumping out as well.
Gary -- "BC breakage" == base-class breakage? As in: the common
base-class for all of the VFS Providers has changed (and would
require changes from anyone downstream that has built their own)?
It refers to (binary) backward compatibility. For a client a new method
in an interface is a compatible change which fits into a minor update.
However when you have to implement a interface as a VFS provider you
wont be binary and source compatible. For most classes it is not a
problem since the mehtod is provided by the AbstractBaseClass for an
interface (but not all Interfaces have that and it was never mandatory
for an provider to use them).
Ah ok. Thanks for the clarification on "BC".
I can try to start pounding on an initial RC in the evenings this
week. I'll be sure to reach out as I need some more help/karma ;)
Anything more needed from me?
Not at the moment. I will reach out if/when I get stuck
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
