Hi, I am +1 for doing releases but I have not much time at the moment to produce them. I will not be available to cut new releases before July.
So, if anyone would like to go for it before that - just do it ;) Best, - Fabian 2013/6/5 Reto Bachmann-Gmür <[email protected]>: > I would like to see the stanbol archetypes in the release. > > Cheers, > Reto > On Jun 5, 2013 1:06 PM, "Rupert Westenthaler" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi all >> >> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Fabian Christ >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> ...No releases were published since March 2013 report.... >> > >> > It's good to indicate when the last release was. >> > >> >> This reminded me that we should work on the next Stanbol release(s). >> >> Please use this thread to list components that should be released. On >> my list are >> >> (1) commons.solr.* >> >> The upgrade to Solr4 is a major improvement and yet to be released. >> >> (2) enhancer & enhancement-engines >> >> We created branches for 0.10.1 releases to prepare incompatible API >> changes for EnhancementProperties. However until now we have not made >> this changes and also not done any changes to the branches. Because of >> that I would suggest that we do a maintenance release of those >> components (0.10.1) by updating the branches from the trunk. >> >> This release will also include some additional EnhancementEngines. IMO >> those should be released using the 0.10.1 version tag (even that there >> is no 0.10.0). >> >> (3) entityhub >> >> While we pushed the trunk version after the last release from 0.11.0 >> to 0.12.0 there where no major changes. Therefore I would like to >> forge a 0.11.1 release of the entityhub from an own branch instead of >> a 0.12.0 from the trunk. >> >> (4) binary release >> >> I would like to release a Stanbol Launcher that does not include the >> default configuration and can therefore be released as binary >> artifact. While such a launcher would not be great for demo purposes >> IMO it is important to have a released version that can be used by >> users to create their own customized launcher configurations. >> >> >> best >> Rupert >> >> >> -- >> | Rupert Westenthaler [email protected] >> | Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907 >> | A-5500 Bischofshofen >> -- Fabian http://twitter.com/fctwitt
