Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of josh.elser@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.216.175 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <535EE73A.70000@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 19:41:46 -0400
From: Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Subject: Re: CHANGES file for 1.6.0-RC5
References: 
 <CAL5zq9ZkNGTDgcvXXCgGCX0few6TCLt3rhEAj8+F4euOf_4ESQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAL5zq9ZkNGTDgcvXXCgGCX0few6TCLt3rhEAj8+F4euOf_4ESQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

b, please.

I would lean towards C over D as I think that's what we've done 
previously, but I do not have strong feelings either way.

On 4/28/14, 7:29 PM, Christopher wrote:
> All,
>
> Mike had an objection to the inclusion of 1.4.0 and 1.5.0 changes in
> the CHANGES file for 1.6.0.
> That objection was based on his understanding of a previous thread.
> I'm not sure there was ever consensus on what to do, and I had a
> different understanding of the results of that thread. I'd like to
> resolve this with extreme haste.
>
> Background:
>
> The current 1.6.0-RC CHANGES have included 1.4.0, and 1.5.0, and
> 1.6.0, with the expectation that 1.6.1 would contain all those, plus
> 1.6.1, and 1.6.2 would contain all those, plus 1.6.2 changes, etc.
> This fits with how we are currently labeling things in JIRA.
> However, we could just as easily drop 1.4.0 and 1.5.0 changes from the
> file, and it still matches what we're doing in JIRA. This is what
> happened with 1.5.0.
>
> So, which do we do? a or b:
>
> a) include 1.4.0, 1.5.0
> b) do not include 1.4.0, 1.5.0
>
> Additionally, should we (c or d):
>
> c) include sub-tasks
> d) do not include sub-tasks
>
> I'll update the CHANGES for RC5 according to the majority view from
> this discussion at the time I prep RC5 (probably tomorrow morning).
> I lean towards (b) and (d), but don't feel very strongly. I just don't
> want to see a released blocked on this file.
>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>