I'm perfectly fine with moving to git, but that's mainly because it's what I use every day as it is.
On 5 August 2014 07:26, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: > I think this makes sense. As a general practice having at least two or > three patch releases after a major or minor release is probably a good > idea. It is also fair to point out that it is highly unlikely that we would > generate a patch release for an older version - once 2.1 is released it is > unlikely we would go back and release 2.0.2. > > Ralph > > On Aug 5, 2014, at 4:19 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > > I should have been clearer, sorry. I am suggesting we take a week (or two) > and have a round of bug fixing for a 2.0.2, even if those are just low > hanging fruits. This will give us a "better 2.0", then we do new features. > As a user, that would give me confidence the log4j team is listening to bug > reports before going back to having fun adding new features. > > 2c, > Gary > > Gary > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Remko Popma > Date:08/05/2014 00:48 (GMT-05:00) > To: Log4J Developers List > Subject: Re: Which direction to focus on next? > > Thanks, Matt. > > Gary, Ralph, what do you think? > Where should we work on new features? I see these options: > > 1. Don't work on new features, or keep new features on our local machines, > don't commit to apache svn. (TBD: until when?) > > 2. Everyone creates separate branches for new features they want to work > on. So Remko would have a binary logging/memmap branch, and a branch for > deleting old rolled-over files, Matt would have a jdbc-batched-inserts > branch, etc. Bugfixes go into trunk. Everyone is free to sync their > branch(es) with trunk's bugfixes or not. > > 3. We create a shared 2.1 branch for new features. Bugfixes go into trunk > as well as the 2.1 branch. > > 4. Both new features and bugfixes are committed to trunk. No branches > needed. > > 5. The opposite of option 3: we create a 2.0.2 branch that holds bugfixes > only. Trunk has both new features and bugfixes. > > 6. Any alternatives that I missed? > > Gary, in the past you mentioned you don't like the busywork of maintaining > two branches. I'm fine with that, but to me that means new features can go > into trunk, because I really don't like option 1... > > Thoughts? > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2014/08/05, at 11:31, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think we can easily do bug fixes from the tag. > > > On 4 August 2014 21:15, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Well, the thing is, I've been holding back on this and prioritized >> bugfixes for over a year now in order to get 2.0 out the door. I've really >> been looking forward to working on these new things. >> >> So what am I supposed to do? There will never be an end to new bugs being >> reported. >> >> Not happy, >> Remko... >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 2014/08/05, at 10:24, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It seems that there are some fixes and pending bugs since we started the >> 2.0.1 vote that would justify a 2.0.2. Then we could do 2.1. My feeling is >> that our priority should be to fix 2.0.x as much as possible before adding >> more features for a 2.1. IOW, let's stabilize the current features in >> 2.0.x, then add complexity and possible bugs with new features. >> >> Gary >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Are there any outstanding issues we'd like to address in a 2.0.2 >>> release, or should we just start working toward 2.1 now instead? Because if >>> we go the 2.1 route of focus, I've got a few branches to merge back >>> together (thankfully, git-svn will help a lot in that regard) into trunk. >>> >>> As Ralph (IIRC) pointed out, we don't need to make an explicit 2.0 >>> branch since we can just branch from the 2.0.1 tag itself if necessary. >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >> >> > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
