Non binding and I too think EOL of 2.1 is okay. Its a bit fast though for a project that is just 1 year old. +1 for option 1.
There may be Camel and SMX users who are on Karaf 2.1. And they don't migrate to new releases so often. But I guess we can find out to help them if a critical issues is discovered in the 2.1 codebase. Camel 2.8 is now on Karaf 2.2.2 so future Camel releases should be safe. On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 3:22 AM, Johan Edstrom <[email protected]> wrote: > Non binding but I think EOL is great. > > +1 for option 1. > > /je > > On Jul 12, 2011, at 7:18 PM, Freeman Fang wrote: > >> +1 for option 1. >> >> Freeman >> On 2011-7-13, at 上午2:30, Jamie G. wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> As the 3.0.0 release draws near we'll be moving the 2.x branches to >>> maintenance mode. I think as we do this we should consider the fate of >>> the last 2.1.x release version. Currently there are 5 resolved issued >>> in JIRA, with no outstanding items on 2.1.6. I would like to propose >>> two options; >>> >>> 1) Release 2.1.6 and mark it in JIRA as the EOL (no entry for 2.1.7). Or, >>> >>> 2) Leave it open in JIRA, and mark the version in JIRA as EOL, not to >>> be released. >>> >>> Regardless of which choice we opt for, I think that we should >>> de-allocate the jenkins profile as we're not actively developing the >>> branch (https://builds.apache.org/job/Karaf-2.1.x/). We'll of course >>> create new profile for 3.0.x and 3.1.x once those branches are >>> available. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Jamie >> >> --------------------------------------------- >> Freeman Fang >> >> FuseSource >> Email:[email protected] >> Web: fusesource.com >> Twitter: freemanfang >> Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- FuseSource Email: [email protected] Web: http://fusesource.com Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
