2016-03-12 0:05 GMT+01:00 Nicholas Grealy <[email protected]>: > Looks like it's just you and me, Pascal! > > Just some questions for the broader dev community: > > - Who can perform the release? - Cédric looked like he single handedly > pushed out version 2.4.6 - can we ask him to prepare the 2.5 beta release? > > Until we've switched to a new release process, it's still easier if I do it, yes.
> > - > - Is there anything outstanding for a 2.5 beta release? - Whoever's > we're waiting on, can we get an update? > > There are lots of outstanding issues, that's why it's a beta. In particular, the new (exciting!) macro stuff is not documented, nor the AST matcher complete. It's a super nice feature that deserves polishing. Plus, there are some decisions to be made with regards to applying the global `macro` AST xform globally or not, in particular with groovy-all. We can solve this after the beta, for sure, but we need to think about it. > > - > - Do we need a VOTE thread for a beta release? > > Yes, it's a release. We can call it "beta", "rc" or "mushroom", it's a release anyway :) Cheers! > > - > > > Kind regards, > Nick > > On Mon, 7 Mar 2016 at 22:52 Nicholas Grealy <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Sun, 6 Mar 2016 20:37 Pascal Schumacher <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hello everybody, >>> >>> as far as I remember there was wide support for releasing a 2.5 beta in >>> the "Release 2.4.6 and 2.5.0-beta?" discussion. >>> >>> The release announcement for 2.4.6 contained the sentence "... be >>> prepared for a 2.5.0-beta release soon!". Tomorrow that will be two >>> weeks ago, so I think we should make some plans when we start the >>> release vote and who will be able to serve as a release manager. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Pascal >>> >>
