Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4B0CD540.9030309@batkin.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 06:57:04 +0000
From: Adam Batkin <adam@batkin.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
 rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20091014 Fedora/3.0-2.8.b4.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ant Developers List <dev@ant.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Propose 1.7.2 Bugfix Release
References: <4B0AFDA5.40406@batkin.net> <hef402$5ll$1@ger.gmane.org>
 <87iqd0a4o1.fsf@v35516.1blu.de>
In-Reply-To: <87iqd0a4o1.fsf@v35516.1blu.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 11/24/2009 05:10 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2009-11-23, Jesse Glick<jesse.glick@sun.com>  wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure backporting bug fixes is worth the effort when there is
>> nothing in particular holding up a 1.8.0 release that I know of.
>
> Time, but that applies to any release.
>
> I am planning to volunteer as release manager for 1.8.0 by the end of
> the year - I had hoped to get to it earlier than that but real life got
> into the way.
>
> FWIW I wouldn't object a 1.7.2 release but completely lack the time to
> support it.
>
>  From my POV the only things missing for a 1.8.0 release are proper
> documentation of target-group and better documentation on the include
> (and its difference WRT import) task.  No biggies.  I do have some
> concerns because of the exec unit tests failures.

So if people on this list think that 1.8.0 will come out in a reasonable 
timeframe (and/or at least seriously discuss a timeframe so that people 
looking for critical fixes can plan appropriately) then I can wait until 
then.

Otherwise I'd be interested in branching from 1.7.1, picking a bunch of 
bugs and merging in those patches. I think the criteria for fixes would 
have to be something like:
- Someone cares enough about the particular issue that they say that it 
should be specifically included
- Fix already exists
- Fix is reasonably easy to merge in (i.e. doesn't depend on some major 
structural change for 1.8.0)
- Fix is backwards compatible (except in cases where backwards 
compatible means "totally broken")

I would be willing to take a stab at it. I'm not an Ant committer (and 
don't expect to be made one any time soon, given that I just "walked in 
off the street" and you have no idea who I am) so we'd need to figure 
out something from a technical perspective. Perhaps I could create a 
local Mercurial clone of the repository and push changes to that, so 
that each commit could be viewed individually (rather than a gigantic 
patch at the end).

Thanks,

-Adam Batkin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org