Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill. Kalle
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote: > No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;) Thanks for doing the rollback! > > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think. Can you do the rollback >>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add >>> the fix to trunk? >> >> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the >> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch >> (hey you asked for it :) >> >> Kalle >> >> >>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically >>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an >>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points >>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to >>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the >>>> release now that we've tested the process works. >>>> >>>> Kalle >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
