Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167

httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
<[email protected]> wrote:
> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>
> The staging repository is at
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
> The Maven site/documentation is at
> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
> final location for the site.
>
> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
> out? There's a sample template at
> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>
> Kalle
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>
>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>
>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>
>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Les
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to