On 12 April 2012 17:10, Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com> wrote: > Fwiw, I have a local fork of the 0.3.x aries maintenance branch which we > could use as a basis for releasing our own version of the code if we need. > I think that would be beneficial for the Karaf 2.x branches where we could > get a bunch a bug fixes that we can't otherwise access. > > I know Geronimo has already released forked Aries code, (I suppose because > of the exact same issue) so I don't think that's a real problem: > > http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/geronimo/ext/aries/blueprint/org.apache.aries.blueprint/
I'm not sure where the source for that is, since they don't have svn elements in their pom. I'd *much* prefer to release Aries from the Aries project. Creating forks in Karaf and Geronimo won't help keep the Aries community together. After all, where does a user go to discuss that Geronimo release of Aries? The Geronimo list or the Aries list. As a fork it splits the community. So I'm +1 for doing Aries maintenance releases, but -1 for doing them outside Aries. > > Thoughts ? > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 17:18, Holly Cummins <holly.k.cumm...@googlemail.com >> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Unless it's based on a branch from an older blueprint level, I'm fairly >> sure that releasing blueprint 0.4.1 isn't much less work than releasing >> 1.0.0. >> >> The reason is that the new blueprint code will only resolve against a new >> version of the util bundle. No existing bundles will resolve against the >> new util bundle, so any bundles with a util dependency will also need to be >> re-released. >> >> This is pretty wretched, but such issues should go away once we're using >> version numbers above 1. >> >> I'm going slightly slower with the 1.0.0 work than I could because I'm >> making sure that all the 1.0.0 bundles work together; at the moment I'm >> unpicking a problem with the application deployment tests and recent >> testsupport bundles, for example. This could be deferred until after the >> first 1.0.0 bundles roll off the assembly line, depending how urgently >> Karaf need a new release. I think it's neater to do things as I am, but >> pragmatism and neatness aren't always friends. >> >> In either case, a new release hasn't been forgotten, and I am working away >> at it. :) >> >> Holly >> >> >> On 11 Apr 2012, at 19:33, "Yonker, Jonathan" <jonathan.yon...@lmco.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hello, >>> >>> From reading through the mailing list, it appears that I'm not the only >>> one with this question, but I still have to ask. Is there currently any >>> timeline for the 0.4.1 release? It appears that all issues in JIRA were >>> resolved quite a while ago, so it appears that the only problem are the >>> release problems that I've been reading about on the mailing list. The >>> project that I'm working on runs on Karaf and we're eagerly awaiting some >>> of the bugfixes from the 0.4.x branch, but Karaf is waiting for 0.4.1 >>> before they upgrade from 0.3.1 ( https://issues.apache.org/** >>> jira/browse/KARAF-988 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-988>). >>> Does anyone have a good guess on the feasibility of releasing 0.4.1 rather >>> than just going right to 1.0? >>> >>> Thanks for any updates you can provide! >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Jon >>> >> > > > -- > ------------------------ > Guillaume Nodet > ------------------------ > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ > ------------------------ > FuseSource, Integration everywhere > http://fusesource.com
