Emmanuel Venisse ha scritto:
> Team,
> 
> What do we do for this issue? Do we move it to the next version or do
> you want to see it resolved in 2.0-beta-6?

My preference as *user* is to have 2.0-beta-6 out asap.

If I understood it correctly MRELEASE-128 is not a regression introduced
since 2.0-beta-5 (otherwise I would delay the 2.0-beta-6) so 2.0-beta-6
is anyway better than 2.0-beta-5 right now and we are waiting for a new
release of this release plugin since weeks :-)

The 2.0-beta-6 release will not delay a following 2.0-beta-7, imho.

So, here is my non-binding +1 for the release.

Stefano

> Emmanuel
> 
> Stephane Nicoll a écrit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to revert my vote to -1 (non veto) because of the following
>> issue:
>> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-128
>>
>> It has a high number of votes and does not work on CVS.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Stéphane
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/22/07, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'd like to release the release manager and the release plugin.
>>>
>>> These versions included some bug fixes, a new goal for the branch
>>> creation and the latest Maven-SCM (1.0)
>>>
>>> The Road Map:
>>> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11144&styleName=Html&version=13452
>>>
>>>
>>> Staging repo:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~evenisse/stage/release_plugin_repo/
>>> You'll need this repo
>>> (http://people.apache.org/~evenisse/stage/maven-scm-repo/) too, for
>>> Maven-SCM 1.0 artifacts
>>>
>>> Tag: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/release/tags/maven-release-3/
>>>
>>> So, let's try 72h +1/+0/-1. Please cast your votes!
>>>
>>> Here my +1
>>>
>>> Emmanuel



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to