Preparing and running an openjpa release always takes a bit. The TCK is pretty huge and it's usus to first create a maintenance branch and heavy testing.
But it really needs to be done imo. I'll start a discuss on that topic. LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: David Blevins <[email protected]> > To: [email protected]; Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 6:01 PM > Subject: Re: Release time? > > > On Jan 4, 2012, at 12:33 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > >> if you have the openjpa-maven-plugin-2.2.0-SNAPSHOT, then you most > definitely also have openjpa itself in 2.2.0-SNAPSHOT. >> >> I'm using an internally released version of it in 2 projects, and > OpenJPA-2.2.0-SNAPSHOT is really stable. >> >> So we could also push for shipping an OpenJPA release. I can take over > driving this part (I'm OpenJPA committer). >> I found quite a few (personal) show stoppers in openjpa-2.1.x which we > fixed in 2.2.x > > Any gut feeling on how long releases take in OpenJPA-land? > >> If you still like to use openjpa-2.1.x, then just use the org.codehaus.mojo > version of the plugin instead [1]. They are basically the same source, I just > moved the plugin over to openjpa to make it easier to maintain and test with > OpenJPA itself. > > Probably the TCK will be the biggest indicator if we can switch, then 2.2.x > release time. > > Not sure where our SNAPSHOT discussions will end up, but I can see us > potentially releasing now with prior versions of the SNAPSHOTs then beginning > another release in 2-3 weeks as the newer versions come along. > > Seems like there's some merit in releasing now and giving people just a bit > more time to get their releases out the door. > > > -David > > >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: David Blevins <[email protected]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 7:56 AM >>> Subject: Re: Release time? >>> >>> >>> On Jan 3, 2012, at 1:52 PM, David Blevins wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 3, 2012, at 12:57 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> Can we use timestamped snapshot as a workaround (for snapshot > deps, I >>> mean)? >>>> >>>> We could maybe release the code ourselves like Geronimo does from > time to >>> time. Just copy it in, update the groupIds and release it. >>> >>> Looking at our snapshots we have: >>> >>> - javaee-api 6.0-3-SNAPSHOT >>> - cxf 2.5.1-SNAPSHOT >>> - owb 1.1.4-SNAPSHOT >>> - bval 0.4-incubating-SNAPSHOT >>> - karaf-maven-plugin 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT >>> - openejb-openwebbeans-jsf 1.1.2-SNAPSHOT >>> - org.apache.karaf.tooling.exam.container 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT >>> - openjpa-maven-plugin 2.2.0-SNAPSHOT >>> - openejb-jstl 1.3-SNAPSHOT >>> >>> Some of these will be easy to deal with, but these seem a bit trickier: >>> >>> - karaf-maven-plugin 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT >>> - org.apache.karaf.tooling.exam.container 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT >>> - openjpa-maven-plugin 2.2.0-SNAPSHOT >>> >>> From a compliance perpective it looks like we're good with the > following >>> previous versions: >>> >>> - cxf 2.5.0 >>> - owb 1.1.3 >>> - bval 0.3-incubating (our patched version) >>> >>> We could easily release again in two weeks or so when these things are > all >>> released. We keep saying we want to release more frequently but we > haven't >>> yet done it. Releasing again when these binaries are out might be a > good way to >>> get into that habit. >>> >>> Holding our release isn't that appealing and neither is using >>> non-reproducable timestamped versions. Neither are really good habits. >>> >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> >>> -David >>> >
