cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject Re: [vote] Releasing from trunk (cocoon-core-2.2.0-M2 and others)
Date Thu, 14 Dec 2006 04:16:47 GMT
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> >Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> >>Please cast your votes, whether we want to publish these artifacts to the 
> >>official Maven repository and make the release official. The vote is open 
> >>for 72 hours.
> >
> >-1
> >
> >I tried to raise these issues when Reinhard proposed the release plan.
> >
> >The procedure is not being followed. We need to vote on sources,
> >not binaries. We also need to publish those sources as the release.
> for e.g. cocoon-core you find sources, binaries and javadocs in 

Hmmm, sorry, i see them now. Not sure what i was looking at then.
I am happy about the "sources" aspect now, so +1 from me.

> >We also need to know which SVN revision corresponds to the release.
> These can be found in
> >See the last paragraph of
> After reading it again, I'm not sure of what a release really is. From my 
> understanding everything is a release, whether it is something you call, 
> alpha, beta, GA or whatever.
> >I am not just being a stickler for procedure, rather that the
> >PMC has responsibilities.
> What are you missing exactly?

The non-missing sources. :-)

> >Perhaps follow the release procedure that Carsten already has been using,
> >of course with the additional maven bits.
> Again, what are you missing? Except the JIRA updates I think everything is 
> done to vote on the artifacts, isn't it?
> >Why is there an "-M2" in the artefact names? If it is a "release"
> >and not a "milestone" then it should be named "2.2.0".
> For me both things are releases
> Releases are, by definition, anything that is published beyond the group 
> that owns it. In our case, that means any publication outside the group of 
> people on the product dev list. If the general public is being instructed 
> to download a package, then that package has been released. Each PMC must 
> obey the ASF requirements on approving any release. How you label the 
> package is a secondary issue, described below. [...]
> but if I'm wrong with my interpreation I have not problem in saying that 
> the milestones are no releases in the sense of the above text.

I thought that the "milestone" naming was something leading
up to a release, and intended for developers.

So at what point do we drop the "-M*" appendage?


View raw message