On Apr 7, 2010, at 8:14 AM, Anil Patel wrote: > This makes sense to me. > Isn't this similar to what Eclipse does, RC1 ,RC2 .... Finally RC 6 becomes > final release. Then final release is maintained. > > So we can do RC10.04, RC10.06, and at some point RC10.06 is stable to be > released.
Yes, this is good, even if for ASF they will all be official releases (no RC): but 10.04, 10.6 will be "alpha" (or similar) releases and "10.06" will be a "stable" release. Even if, and I always insist on this, only the community, with the contributions coming from users of the "stable" release, will decide if the "stable" release will be "maintained": this cannot be a responsibility of committers. Jacopo > > Thanks and Regards > Anil Patel > HotWax Media Inc > Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz" > > On Apr 7, 2010, at 2:07 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > >> I would suggest to: >> 1) release 10.04 before the merge is done >> 2) merge the code to the trunk, switch to it, fix any possible issue >> 3) do another release (10.06?) >> >> I know this is not inline with what we currently think a release should be, >> but this is very inline with what the ASF practices and so I will continue >> to insist with the release-often practice. :-) >> >> Jacopo >> >> On Apr 4, 2010, at 8:21 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: >> >>> I would like to start bringing parts of the executioncontext20091231 branch >>> into the trunk before we create the next release branch. The implementation >>> of the new security design is not finished, but it will be disabled - so >>> everything will still work the same. >>> >>> My goal is to allow users of the 10.x release to plan for the forthcoming >>> changes, and maybe have the conversion to the new design completed by the >>> release that follows 10.x. >>> >>> I will wait a few days, and if there are no objections I will begin merging >>> the design into the trunk. >>> >>> -Adrian >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >
