+1 If in this 24-48 hours period this bug has not been resolved, we can prepare the new release without the last patches...
Bruno 2005/9/7, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > We can wait a day or two on the code freeze but IMO that means we > should hold off on new patches that might cause new bugs like the one > you're describing. So my suggestion is to focus the next 24 - 48 > hours on getting everything working again so we can branch. Then the > JSR-127 stuff can continue on the HEAD. > > Can we agree on this plan of action? Will someone let me know when we > reach this point? > > sean > > > On 9/7/05, Bruno Aranda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > +0.9 The code should be frozen once all the examples work. Now, there > > is a major bug ( MYFACES-528) that mail that dataTables, buffers, > > and some other components do not work ok, due to the resolution of > > MYFACES-509 (StateManager.saveSerializedView must throw an > > IllegalStateException when View contains duplicate IDs). We could > > build a release candidate but we cannot release without a solution to > > this bug. The other option is not to include the patches applied for > > MYFACES-509 (everything worked before, but we did not check for > > duplicated id's). > > > > Regards, > > > > Bruno > > > > 2005/9/7, Abrams, Howard A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > +1 > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Sean Schofield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 10:24 AM > > > > To: MyFaces Development > > > > Subject: Release decisions > > > > > > > > I just fixed an important stumbling block in the build script so now > > > > it should be possible to build a release *without* the sandbox stuff > > > > (and without the build crashing.) There have been a lot of changes to > > > > the HEAD during the past week, so I'm not sure how we should proceed. > > > > > > > > My thinking is that we should rebuild the 1_0_10 tag/branch with the > > > > newest code and just heavily test. I think there is too much stuff in > > > > the HEAD that we would want. But at some point we need to freeze the > > > > 1.0.10 code. > > > > > > > > So I propose that I make a new 1.0.10 branch off the latest code and > > > > that we use that to build a release candidate. Only the most > > > > important bugs (such as missing stuff from the release bundle) would > > > > then be addressed in 1.0.10. Last minute requests for fixing specific > > > > bugs will be fixed on the trunk but they won't go into 1.0.10. > > > > > > > > Can I get a few +1's on that? > > > > > > > > sean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
