My vote is to leave it the way it is. My conservative, pragmatic and adventurous sides are all satisfied by having a single GA release as well as the latest "Beta" release available for download. 2.2 is available in the past releases if people want it.
Cheers, Clinton On 12/1/06, Jeff Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I forgot about that conversation, I was thinking of this one: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@ibatis.apache.org/msg01855.html A great example of selective memory on my part :) Anyway I'm open to a GA vote for 2.2 if we need to. But maybe we should let the dust settle on 2.3 for a few days. If it looks like it will fly, then we could do the 2.3 GA vote a little sooner. The major thing in 2.3was prepared statement caching and I know there's already been some public testing of it. Most of the fixes I did were for esoteric issues. I think 2.3 is pretty solid. Your thoughts - should I post the 2.2 build to the mirrors? That wouldn't take much effort now that I know how to sign releases (it was a strange trip into command line hacker heaven). Jeff Butler On 12/1/06, Clinton Begin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > To clarify, what I suggested a week or so ago was: > > "We can vote for GA anytime, even after another release makes it to GA. > The beta, alpha, GA status is always flexible. We could vote for GA on > 2.2. right now actually. " > > So a little closer to what Brandon is suggesting. However, I'm more > interested in leaving 2.1.7 and 2.2 in the past and getting 2.3 to GA. > > Cheers, > Clinton > > On 12/1/06, Jeff Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > We discussed this some weeks ago. IIRC, Clinton wanted to do a new > > release rather than voting for GA on 2.2. > > > > Jeff Butler > > > > > > > > On 12/1/06, Brandon Goodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > Curious why we are superceding 2.2 wit 2.3? 2.2 has been available > > > for some time and contains several bug fixes over 2.1.7. I would > > > also say that 2.2.0 could be made GA. The other thought is that > > > there is no guarantee that 2.3 will be GA quality after we get it > > > out there for 2 weeks, however unlikely that may be. Thanks for getting this > > > all together! > > > > > > B > > > > > > On 11/30/06, Jeff Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > I have everything built for 2.3, and have everything signed and > > > > checksummed. Unfortunately, there are permission problems in the .../dist > > > > directories, so I'm stuck right now. I've sent a note to infra@ and as soon > > > > as they get the permission problems resolved, then I'll be able to publish > > > > the release. > > > > > > > > This will be the first iBATIS/Java release that uses the Apache > > > > mirroring structure - I'm going to implement the new Apache release policy > > > > according to the notice the committers received a couple of weeks ago. > > > > > > > > My release plan looks like this: > > > > > > > > 1. Post the 2.3 and 2.1.7 builds to the mirrors. 2.3 will > > > > superceed 2.2, so no need to post it > > > > 2. Label 2.3 as beta, 2.1.7 is still the GA release > > > > 3. Call for a vote for 2.3 GA two weeks after 2.3 is posted > > > > > > > > I'll keep you posted - hopefully I'll get it done tomorrow. > > > > > > > > Jeff Butler > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
