Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Hopefully it will be one cut, one vote, and Xmas vacation :) On Dec 11, 2006, at 10:58 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: Do we really need to vote on all of these, and then release and then revote, blah, blah? I mean do we want to spend so much energy on a pre-alpha tech preview? --jason On Dec 11, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: You do not need a branch for this. You can easily make a release like this using `mvn release:*` off of trunk, and it will update the poms, label and then update to the next version for development. I was thinking that our normal process is branch...make a tar ball or two to vote on, modify stuff, cut another one, etc. Doing this straight out of trunk would work if everything was perfect but if people didn't like the content we'd have to do it again. how would that affect Maven? Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Do we really need to vote on all of these, and then release and then revote, blah, blah? I mean do we want to spend so much energy on a pre-alpha tech preview? --jason On Dec 11, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: You do not need a branch for this. You can easily make a release like this using `mvn release:*` off of trunk, and it will update the poms, label and then update to the next version for development. I was thinking that our normal process is branch...make a tar ball or two to vote on, modify stuff, cut another one, etc. Doing this straight out of trunk would work if everything was perfect but if people didn't like the content we'd have to do it again. how would that affect Maven? Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: You do not need a branch for this. You can easily make a release like this using `mvn release:*` off of trunk, and it will update the poms, label and then update to the next version for development. I was thinking that our normal process is branch...make a tar ball or two to vote on, modify stuff, cut another one, etc. Doing this straight out of trunk would work if everything was perfect but if people didn't like the content we'd have to do it again. how would that affect Maven? Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: OpenEJB will need to release as well so I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues tonight or tomorrow. FYI, I have a similar thread on openejb-dev about releasing 2.2. Make sure you read/reply if you have any open 2.2 issues. -David
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
You do not need a branch for this. You can easily make a release like this using `mvn release:*` off of trunk, and it will update the poms, label and then update to the next version for development. --jason On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:37 PM, Paul McMahan wrote: In order to make a release you have to touch several files, such as bumping the versions from 2.0-SNAPSHOT to 2.0-M1 in the poms. IIUC that is all we need the branch for and can otherwise continue working on trunk without porting changes back to the branch. Best wishes, Paul On 12/11/06, Prasad Kashyap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Another Q. If a branch is made, would the code there have to maintained ? Would bug fixes in 1.2 be rolled into the trunk as well as the M1 branch ? I hope not. I hope it is just for tagging purpose and the code there would not have to be maintained post M1 release. Cheers Prasad On 12/11/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why? I don't see why we would want to make a branch just for 2.0-m1. > > SVN is not the best tool for working with many branches, so I would > recommend keeping the active branches to an absolute minimum. > > What happened to stabilizing 1.2 and getting that out? > > I think that if you want to make 2.0-m1, then just pick a time on > trunk when it looks good, then make the release and move on to the > next milestone. IMO adding more branches here will just complicate > the matter way more than it needs to be for a pre-alpha release. > > --jason > > > On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: > > > All, > > > > Being the overly optimistic one that I am I'd like to branch trunk > > tomorrow in the afternoon. The goal of the branch is to stabilize > > a milestone release with the content previously discussed. > > > > So far it looks like we have: > > > > JSF, > > Java Mail > > Tomcat 6 > > Jetty 6 > > JSTL > > Java 1.5 ready > > and JPA > > > > I think Kevan is working on the specs which need to be completed > > for Geronimo 2.0 as well as 1.2. OpenEJB will need to release as > > well so I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues > > tonight or tomorrow. > > > > I'm currently working through some issues with DayTrader on 1.2 > > which also apply to Geronimo 2.0. My thiking is that people will > > continue to work on trunk (2.0) while the M1 release is cleaned and > > made ready. I'll do the packaging and people can happily continue > > to hack away at trunk. > > > > Any major items missing? > > > > Matt Hogstrom > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
In order to make a release you have to touch several files, such as bumping the versions from 2.0-SNAPSHOT to 2.0-M1 in the poms. IIUC that is all we need the branch for and can otherwise continue working on trunk without porting changes back to the branch. Best wishes, Paul On 12/11/06, Prasad Kashyap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Another Q. If a branch is made, would the code there have to maintained ? Would bug fixes in 1.2 be rolled into the trunk as well as the M1 branch ? I hope not. I hope it is just for tagging purpose and the code there would not have to be maintained post M1 release. Cheers Prasad On 12/11/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why? I don't see why we would want to make a branch just for 2.0-m1. > > SVN is not the best tool for working with many branches, so I would > recommend keeping the active branches to an absolute minimum. > > What happened to stabilizing 1.2 and getting that out? > > I think that if you want to make 2.0-m1, then just pick a time on > trunk when it looks good, then make the release and move on to the > next milestone. IMO adding more branches here will just complicate > the matter way more than it needs to be for a pre-alpha release. > > --jason > > > On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: > > > All, > > > > Being the overly optimistic one that I am I'd like to branch trunk > > tomorrow in the afternoon. The goal of the branch is to stabilize > > a milestone release with the content previously discussed. > > > > So far it looks like we have: > > > > JSF, > > Java Mail > > Tomcat 6 > > Jetty 6 > > JSTL > > Java 1.5 ready > > and JPA > > > > I think Kevan is working on the specs which need to be completed > > for Geronimo 2.0 as well as 1.2. OpenEJB will need to release as > > well so I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues > > tonight or tomorrow. > > > > I'm currently working through some issues with DayTrader on 1.2 > > which also apply to Geronimo 2.0. My thiking is that people will > > continue to work on trunk (2.0) while the M1 release is cleaned and > > made ready. I'll do the packaging and people can happily continue > > to hack away at trunk. > > > > Any major items missing? > > > > Matt Hogstrom > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Another Q. If a branch is made, would the code there have to maintained ? Would bug fixes in 1.2 be rolled into the trunk as well as the M1 branch ? I hope not. I hope it is just for tagging purpose and the code there would not have to be maintained post M1 release. Cheers Prasad On 12/11/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Why? I don't see why we would want to make a branch just for 2.0-m1. SVN is not the best tool for working with many branches, so I would recommend keeping the active branches to an absolute minimum. What happened to stabilizing 1.2 and getting that out? I think that if you want to make 2.0-m1, then just pick a time on trunk when it looks good, then make the release and move on to the next milestone. IMO adding more branches here will just complicate the matter way more than it needs to be for a pre-alpha release. --jason On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: > All, > > Being the overly optimistic one that I am I'd like to branch trunk > tomorrow in the afternoon. The goal of the branch is to stabilize > a milestone release with the content previously discussed. > > So far it looks like we have: > > JSF, > Java Mail > Tomcat 6 > Jetty 6 > JSTL > Java 1.5 ready > and JPA > > I think Kevan is working on the specs which need to be completed > for Geronimo 2.0 as well as 1.2. OpenEJB will need to release as > well so I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues > tonight or tomorrow. > > I'm currently working through some issues with DayTrader on 1.2 > which also apply to Geronimo 2.0. My thiking is that people will > continue to work on trunk (2.0) while the M1 release is cleaned and > made ready. I'll do the packaging and people can happily continue > to hack away at trunk. > > Any major items missing? > > Matt Hogstrom > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Why? I don't see why we would want to make a branch just for 2.0-m1. SVN is not the best tool for working with many branches, so I would recommend keeping the active branches to an absolute minimum. What happened to stabilizing 1.2 and getting that out? I think that if you want to make 2.0-m1, then just pick a time on trunk when it looks good, then make the release and move on to the next milestone. IMO adding more branches here will just complicate the matter way more than it needs to be for a pre-alpha release. --jason On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: All, Being the overly optimistic one that I am I'd like to branch trunk tomorrow in the afternoon. The goal of the branch is to stabilize a milestone release with the content previously discussed. So far it looks like we have: JSF, Java Mail Tomcat 6 Jetty 6 JSTL Java 1.5 ready and JPA I think Kevan is working on the specs which need to be completed for Geronimo 2.0 as well as 1.2. OpenEJB will need to release as well so I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues tonight or tomorrow. I'm currently working through some issues with DayTrader on 1.2 which also apply to Geronimo 2.0. My thiking is that people will continue to work on trunk (2.0) while the M1 release is cleaned and made ready. I'll do the packaging and people can happily continue to hack away at trunk. Any major items missing? Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
All, Being the overly optimistic one that I am I'd like to branch trunk tomorrow in the afternoon. The goal of the branch is to stabilize a milestone release with the content previously discussed. So far it looks like we have: JSF, Java Mail Tomcat 6 Jetty 6 JSTL Java 1.5 ready and JPA I think Kevan is working on the specs which need to be completed for Geronimo 2.0 as well as 1.2. OpenEJB will need to release as well so I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues tonight or tomorrow. I'm currently working through some issues with DayTrader on 1.2 which also apply to Geronimo 2.0. My thiking is that people will continue to work on trunk (2.0) while the M1 release is cleaned and made ready. I'll do the packaging and people can happily continue to hack away at trunk. Any major items missing? Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
