I fully agree +1 (binding) regards, Achim
2013/1/16 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > Regarding the discussion, here's my proposal: > > - trunk stays as it is > - I create karaf-2.x branch that will contain 2.x minor releases: 2.4.0, > 2.5.0, 2.6.0 > - the "micro" branches will be created only when necessary > - karaf-2.2.x and karaf-2.3.x stay as they are (as we will have a 2.3.1 > and we have 2.2.x releases) > > We maintain the latest two stable releases (currently 2.3.0 and 2.2.10 for > instance). > > Micro releases should be really to fix only major bugs. We should focus on > minor releases. > > If we are agree with that, I will do that this evening (my time, PCT). > > WDYT ? > > Regards > JB > > On 01/15/2013 05:10 PM, Andreas Pieber wrote: > >> Hey Guys, >> >> I would like to commit Karaf-1563 [1] to the 2.x line; but the only >> branch available now is 2.3.x; while I know that a common argument now >> will be that we should rather focus on 3.x I simply don't like the >> idea to apply new features to micro releases. Those should always be >> stable and new features simply cant gurantee this! >> >> Kind regards, >> Andreas >> >> [1] >> https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/KARAF-1563<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1563> >> >> > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com > -- Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer & Project Lead OPS4J Pax for Vaadin <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & Project Lead blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
