aurora-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mauricio Garavaglia <mauriciogaravag...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: aurora-packaging for 0.13
Date Wed, 15 Jun 2016 00:19:43 GMT
sounds good, thanks!

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Erb, Stephan <Stephan.Erb@blue-yonder.com>
wrote:

> I am way behind my plan for the 0.13 binaries. There is one pending patch
> I'd like to land before building and publishing the 0.13er binaries for a
> vote [1].
>
> Once the 0.13 is out, I'd look into 0.14.
>
> If you are interested and eager, you could speed this up by already
> preparing a review request that would bring
> https://github.com/apache/aurora-packaging into a state ready for 0.14.0.
> I believe the only major necessary changes will be to bump the various
> Aurora and Mesos version string scattered throughout the repository.
>
> [1] https://reviews.apache.org/r/48606/
> ________________________________________
> From: Mauricio Garavaglia <mauriciogaravaglia@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 00:01
> To: dev@aurora.apache.org
> Subject: Re: aurora-packaging for 0.13
>
> Hi!
> Given that we have aurora 0.14 now, can you add the proper branches/tags to
> aurora-packaging to build it? Thanks!
>
> Mauricio
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Erb, Stephan <Stephan.Erb@blue-yonder.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Mauricio,
> >
> > the master of https://github.com/apache/aurora-packaging should be ready
> > to use if you want to build 0.13 binaries.
> >
> > There are some minor cleanups needed before we can do an official release
> > though. I will try to look into this until next week.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Stephan
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Mauricio Garavaglia <mauriciogaravaglia@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 22:19
> > To: dev@aurora.apache.org
> > Subject: aurora-packaging for 0.13
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Looks like the aurora-packaging repo (
> > https://github.com/apache/aurora-packaging) doesn't include a branch for
> > the 0.13.x release, as it happened for previous releases, and the changes
> > got merged right into master. Could at least consider tagging for the
> > particular version intented to be released? Thanks
> >
> > Mauricio
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message