Mailing-List: contact dev-help@archiva.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@archiva.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of aheritier@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.166.181 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:references;
        b=GbJzMB00t9xK027LfGKxG4ube+MmAzRnYyWaCJ0vioOpIscZqA1ybDCuDRXtF69Wm5
         1F79jgUnEAfdE6BdeQcjCb/p1mQFBdw6kNWfCIU/lDIZqN+3D9aYSZ6ZKni6sVAT2N7M
         TaUA8Ti0jE57luViccGI7IKmdY8Rn4Qo1Glvo=
Message-ID: <262c6c680807110124l6ed982d7q160674fbdc8ee5e3@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 10:24:55 +0200
From: "Arnaud HERITIER" <aheritier@gmail.com>
To: dev@archiva.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Archiva 1.1
In-Reply-To: <f345f3480807110115y16d44d1ewa8d9395bd2fe7c83@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_24107_28842683.1215764695428"
References: <1a57a2980807080129r533c6bf7p6a68958653f5cc5a@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1a57a2980807082239o355a5e47pd8ca453ae3b215fc@mail.gmail.com>
	 <adba96190807102313x223051f9q6fe986529e8c987f@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f345f3480807110115y16d44d1ewa8d9395bd2fe7c83@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_24107_28842683.1215764695428
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

I'm also against the idea to have a 1.1.1 without 1.1. It was the coice we
made for the release process (eclipse like vs httpd like)
The only blocker thing I see with the actual 1.1 is the problem to merge
metadata.
I didn't check if it is fixed but if this was done I'm in favor to include
it in 1.1
If we don't know when we'll be able to fix it, we continue the release and
we document the issue.

Arnaud


On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Emmanuel Venisse <
emmanuel.venisse@gmail.com> wrote:

> Will you rename 1.1.1 to 1.1?
> I don't like the idea to release a 1.1.1 without a 1.1 before.
>
> Emmanuel
>
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Wendy Smoak <wsmoak@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Based on all the discussion, my preference is to cancel the vote, not
> > publish 1.1, and just move on with 1.1.1 soon.
> >
> > I don't want to announce it but then advise people to wait for 1.1.1.
> > And putting it in the repo/on the mirrors _without_ announcing it (as
> > suggested on irc this evening) doesn't make sense to me.
> >
> > --
> > Wendy
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Maria Odea Ching <oching@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Everyone,
> > >
> > > Below is a summary of what has been discussed and agreed upon in the
> IRC
> > > earlier today:
> > > 1. Still push 1.1 out and release 1.1.1 right after
> > > 2. Note the localhost issue in the 1.1 release notes so users are aware
> > of
> > > it
> > > 3. There are 3 new issues that will be included in 1.1.1, which are:
> > >    - [MRM-870] - addRepositoryToGroup.action => AbstractMethodError on
> > > DeferredDocumentImpl.getXmlStandalone()
> > >    - [MRM-871] - jetty.host and jetty.port properties are set by
> default
> > in
> > > jetty.xml preventing user from using other hostname if user is not
> aware
> > of
> > > these properties
> > >    - [MRM-730] - Index/Search by class, method or package name
> >
>

------=_Part_24107_28842683.1215764695428--