buildr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Shane Witbeck" <sh...@digitalsanctum.com>
Subject Re: Release date for 1.3
Date Fri, 01 Feb 2008 20:51:17 GMT
I can certainly lend a second set of eyes regarding the documentation
but I would be pretty useless creating the test cases. I've never
written a test case for Ruby/Rake/Buildr but would be willing to
learn!

Regarding the BUILDR-2 issue, I thought I'd mention in case no one
else caught it. In the description the output from Maven and Buildr
indicate their hitting two different repos.

Shane


On 2/1/08, Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com> wrote:
> On 2/1/08, Shane Witbeck <shane@digitalsanctum.com> wrote:
> >
> > Obviously, your the best judge of when to release and it certainly
> > makes sense to wait rather than rush what seems like a relatively
> > large release.
> >
> > You mention loose ends that need to be tied up. Anything that someone
> > like me could help with? I still consider myself a novice with Buildr
> > but maybe I could help with documentation?
>
>
> We have a couple of carry-overs from 1.2.10 that need attending, or at least
> if you can write a test case:
>
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-2
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-22
>
> On the documentation front, mostly reorganizing sections, which is easier to
> do than explain, and then going over the text and reviewing it.  On that, I
> could certainly use another pair of eyes.
>
>
> I'm willing to help out if it means getting the release out quicker.
> > I'm also anxious to get my hands into the plugin/extensions system
> > that was mentioned a while back.
>
>
> That won't be officially part of 1.3.0, but I'm also working on adding it to
> trunk, and include it as alpha feature (undocumented, subject to change) in
> the 1.3.0 release.
>
>
> I've been using 1.3.0 for the last few days without issue.
>
>
> Good to know.
>
> Assaf
>
>
> -Shane
> >
> >
> > On 2/1/08, Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com> wrote:
> > > I was hoping to have the 1.3 release today, but apparently that won't
> > > happen.  Best guess we're a week/two away.
> > >
> > > Most of the new features are coupled to implementation changes, which is
> > why
> > > we're calling this a 1.3 release.  It will not be as stable as 1.2.10,
> > but I
> > > do want to make sure it's stable enough to be an official
> > release.  There's
> > > still a few loose ends that need to be tied.
> > >
> > > Besides code, there's also improvements to the documentation, and
> > covering
> > > the new features.  And here too there are still a few unfinished tasks.
> > >
> > > Since 1.3 is the next upgrade from 1.2.10, I feel it's important to make
> > > sure it's backwards compatible, so I'm spending some time on testing
> > that.
> > > If you can tell me you're successfuly using 1.3 instead of 1.2.10, that
> > will
> > > help.  I also expect to close all outstanding bugs filed against 1.2.10.
> > >
> > > There's a few new features brought up on the mailing list
> > recently.  They
> > > are not part of the original 1.3 plan, which was all about multi-lingual
> > > support and later expanded to include JRuby support.  My fear is that if
> > we
> > > keep adding features, we'll never have a 1.3 release.  And keep in mind,
> > > once 1.3 is out we'll start working on 1.3.x.  These points releases are
> > > easy to roll out, I don't mind making a few of those to introduce new
> > > features.
> > >
> > >
> > > What's your take?
> > >
> > > Assaf
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Shane Witbeck
> > Digital Sanctum, inc.
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > skype: digitalsanctum
> >   blog: http://www.digitalsanctum.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> CTO, Intalio
> http://www.intalio.com
>


-- 
Thank you,

Shane Witbeck
Digital Sanctum, inc.
-----------------------------------------------------
skype: digitalsanctum
  blog: http://www.digitalsanctum.com

Mime
View raw message