I don't think that infra are going to chop us off at the knees, at least not imminently.
we need to wait a bit longer (how long?) before we can say the vote was carried. I take your point of getting this one out asap though. Grammar and spelling have been sacrificed on the altar of messaging via mobile device. On 30 Jun 2011 15:01, "Patricia Shanahan" <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm going to have limited e-mail access (iPhone only) for the next few > hours. > > If our incubator space is about to go away, maybe we should shove this > one out the door, for the sake of the better binaries and having a top > level release, and then produce 2.2.1 ASAP to clean up the loose ends. > > Patricia > > > On 6/30/2011 6:54 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> The build is clean if the classes are removed. At least one QA test >> fails. That is why I suggested as an alternative fix removing the two >> classes and skipping the failing test. >> >> Patricia >> >> >> On 6/30/2011 6:32 AM, Tom Hobbs wrote: >>> Would modifying the build instructions help? And also raising a Jira >>> to fix >>> later. >>> >>> I'm keen to get this release out, obviously. But like you say, bad first >>> impressions do leave a lingering bad feel. >>> >>> how does the build fail with the removed classes? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> Grammar and spelling have been sacrificed on the altar of messaging via >>> mobile device. >>> >>> On 30 Jun 2011 14:12, "Patricia Shanahan"<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On 6/30/2011 1:42 AM, Sim IJskes - QCG wrote: >>>>> On 30-06-11 10:12, Tom Hobbs wrote: >>>>>> Actually, lets have a proper vote thread. >>>>>> >>>>>> Release the artifacts 2.2.0 which can be found in >>>>>> http://river.apache.org/~thobbs/river? >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 Peter Firmstone >>>>>> +1 Tom Hobbs >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Grammar and spelling have been sacrificed on the altar of messaging >>>>>> via >>>>>> mobile device. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> +1 release early, release often! >>>>> >>>> >>>> -0 >>>> >>>> I don't like releasing with source code that does not compile following >>>> the build instructions in the release. It creates a bad first impression >>>> for anyone interested in the source code. I would like to see the build >>>> instructions updated, NameServiceImpl changed to be 1.5 compatible, and >>>> have an opportunity to test the new build instructions. >>>> >>>> On the other hand, the release does get better code into the hands of >>>> people who are only interested in the binary. >>>> >>>> I realize my negative vote is only symbolic. Three positive votes are >>>> enough to permit a release to go out. >>>> >>>> Patricia >>> >> >> >
