I'm undecided about what version number to use, and leave that decision to others.
One issue that I strongly feel needs to go into 2.1.0 final is MNG-3602, the inclusion of Doxia 1.1 into the core. According to the release plan for Doxia [1], Lukas had agreed to release Doxia 1.1. If he's not available to do it I can do it. [1] http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Doxia+Release+Plan John Casey wrote: > I fully agree with Brian about the version naming for the next release. > Given its track record over the last 6 months, using -M1 for the last > release crippled it unfairly in the public view; it's at least as stable > as 2.0.9, even with the problems we had concerning wagon 1.0-beta-4. > > IMO, there is absolutely no reason to do another milestone release. We > should be moving toward 2.1.0 final, resolving the worst regressions and > the most watched/voted-for issues before doing so. Currently, we have > what looks like 4 major issues still unresolved in the 2.1.0 bucket, > judging from the votes. Three of these are in progress, I think. I know > I'm working on MNG-3057, for instance, and I thought Oleg was working on > MNG-553 still...Brett, are you still working on MNG-3379, and did you > plan to finish that before we release 2.1.0? The fourth top issue seems > on the face of it to be based on a common misunderstanding about how > profiles are triggered and applied...probably more of a > documentation/education task than anything else. > > Beyond that, I'm alright releasing 2.1.0 final provided we can be sure > that the wagon version we're using is stable. I seem to remember an > issue coming up shortly after the release of 2.1.0-M1 related to one of > the new Wagon implementations - WebDAV, maybe? I'm having some trouble > remembering/finding that issue in my gmail, but we need to make sure > that doesn't get left out of this release. If it means rolling back to > an older wagon version, then let's do that. > > I'm not in favor of releasing another milestone of 2.1.0 at this point. > Sure, we should have done more work to execute that release plan last > fall. I for one got very sidetracked putting together a build farm that > we can use to help verify future releases of Maven proactively. In any > case, I think the value of milestone releases is greatly diminished at > this point, and we need to get serious about 2.1.0 final. We can push > off the non-critical JIRAs currently slated for 2.1.0 into the 2.1.1 > bucket, and get on with it once we have these four dealt with. > > -john > > Brett Porter wrote: >> So, there seems to be some agreement. >> >> However, I've come back from underground and now there are *two* >> snapshots on trunk. I'm already spending valentine's day alone, so I >> didn't really need another reason to curl up in the corner and cry :) >> >> I would really like to pull an M2 release in the next week with the >> stuff that is already there. John, what do you think? >> >> Thanks, >> Brett >> >> On 10/02/2009, at 9:43 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote: >> >>> Yep good idea. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Brett Porter [mailto:br...@porterclan.net] On Behalf Of Brett >>> Porter >>> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 7:44 PM >>> To: Maven Developers List >>> Subject: Re: Maven 2.1.0 Plans (a proposal of sorts) >>> >>> >>>> >>>> I'm +1 for including it and providing an opt-out switch to turn it >>>> off. If we can make that switch stick permanently via the >>>> settings.xml, so much the better. >>> >>> +1 (even better, configure number of parallel threads, just set it to >>> 1 to turn it off). >>> >>> On 09/02/2009, at 11:18 PM, John Casey wrote: >>> >>>> I'll rearrange the JIRA versions today, then...it looks like we're >>>> all in agreement about moving directly toward 2.1.0 generally. >>>> >>> >>> Let's slow down a bit... >>> >>> We are totally in agreement to moving towards 2.1.0 generally, and the >>> list in JIRA now reflects that. >>> >>> However, I don't see why we'd cancel a milestone release when there's >>> already been good progress. I was all ready to roll that once the >>> remaining snapshot was released (I've been working on it since >>> December since you said you didn't have time), but now JIRA has been >>> transformed and any release is 23 issues (I'm guessing probably 2 >>> weeks minimum) away. Then the RC cycle will be more brutal. >>> >>> Why couldn't we stick to the plan as it was yesterday? Same issues, >>> more intermediate releases. >>> >>> - Brett >>> >>> -- >>> Brett Porter >>> br...@apache.org >>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >> >> -- >> Brett Porter >> br...@apache.org >> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Dennis Lundberg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
