On 7/3/07, Tjeerd Verhagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think it would be good to fix the following two issues before creating the alpha 2 release: IVY-520 Variables not replaced during deliver (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-520)< https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-520> IVY-481 Dependent jars missing in ivy binaries (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-481)< https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-520> No idea how mutch work the IVY-520 would be, but the IVY-481, should be relative simple (I guess).
John already provided a patch for 520, so it only requires reviewing, should be ok. 481 is not to complex, just requires some ant build changes. Both are already assigned to 2.0.0-alpha-2, so they are in the pipe before alpha 2. Thanks for reminding that. Xavier On 7/3/07, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/3/07, Scheper, Erik-Berndt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > +1 from me as well. > > > > BTW Is there already a release plan for the IVYDE (Eclipse IDE > > integration)? > > > No release plan for IvyDE so far. I think we first need to get comfortable > with apache releases for Ivy, then we will move some of our efforts to > IvyDE. But the trunk is working, I use it daily. > > Xavier > > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > > Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Verzonden: dinsdag 3 juli 2007 12:15 > > Aan: [email protected] > > Onderwerp: AW: Release plan (was Re: Steps toward graduation) > > > > > > +1 > > > > * A release version would encourage people to play with Ivy. More than > > with > > an "old" release or a "check out from svn...". > > * You could test and improve the release process. > > * You could do the new packaging format, so people (and repositories) > > would deal > > with that. > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > >-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > >Von: Xavier Hanin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >Gesendet: Dienstag, 3. Juli 2007 11:42 > > >An: [email protected] > > >Betreff: Re: Release plan (was Re: Steps toward graduation) > > > > > >We talked about releasing an alpha 2 version early july, is it still > > >something we want to do? It could be a good sign of progress for our > > >users, and we have a pretty good number of fix and improvements to > > >release it "as > > >is" (it's still an alpha). > > > > > >What do you think? Shall I plan to cut a release this week and > > >submit it to > > >the vote? > > > > > >Xavier > > > > > >On 6/7/07, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > >> On 6/7/07, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > [B] We have done one release in the incubator, but we have > > >no current > > >> > release plan. This is something that we need to discuss in > > >a separate > > >> > thread. > > >> > > >> > > >> We need to discuss our release plan since this is one point > > >required for > > >> graduation, but also because it would be really nice for our > > >user community > > >> to better know where we intend to go. > > >> > > >> Establishing a road map for an open source project where > > >only volunteers > > >> are involved is not easy, because we can't be sure of the time we > > >> (committers) will be able to involve in the project. > > >However, Here are some > > >> thoughts about our roadmap. > > >> > > >> First I think that it would really be nice if we could get graduated > > >> before shipping our final 2.0 release. About the content, I > > >think we need > > >> to concentrate on code cleanup, bug fixing, and maven 2 > > >compatibility. The > > >> cache management issue is also the most voted issue and thus > > >I think it > > >> would really be nice to get it implemented for this 2.0 release. > > >> > > >> According to the work involved, does a following road map make sense: > > >> 2.0-alpha-2 includes reviewed cache management + progress in code > > >cleanup and bug fix, > > >> API not stable yet > > >> => early july > > >> > > >> 2.0-beta-1 > > >> more bug fix and code cleanup, API almost stable, review of tutorials > > >> => late august > > >> > > >> 2.0-RC1 > > >> all major known bug fixed, code cleanup finished for its > > >most important > > >> part (including all removal of _), published API stable, > > >tutorials and > > >> documentation updated > > >> => late september > > >> > > >> 2.0-RCx > > >> every two weeks, depending on the number of major bugs found > > >> > > >> 2.0 final > > >> somewhere between october and november > > >> > > >> With this schedule we would have approximately one year > > >between Ivy 1.4.1and Ivy > > >> 2.0. This is long, but the migration to the ASF, code > > >cleanup and some bug > > >> fixes and improvement take time. Therefore this schedule seems to be > > >> something achievable and reasonable. > > >> > > >> WDYT? > > >> > > >> Xavier > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant > > >> Manage your dependencies with Ivy! http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant > > >Creator of Ivy, xooki and xoocode.org > > >More about me: http://xhab.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > > Disclaimer: > > This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential > > and is the property of Sogeti Nederland B.V. or its Group members. It is > > intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > > intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, > > disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you > > receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and > > delete all copies of this message. > > > > > > -- > Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant > Creator of Ivy, xooki and xoocode.org > More about me: http://xhab.blogspot.com/ >
-- Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant Creator of Ivy, xooki and xoocode.org More about me: http://xhab.blogspot.com/
