commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From robert burrell donkin <robertburrelldon...@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject Re: [digester] 1.7.0 release
Date Tue, 08 Jun 2004 18:59:27 GMT
On 8 Jun 2004, at 02:01, Simon Kitching wrote:

> On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 09:13, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>> i've been pleased to see that simon's been hard at work with TODO 
>> lists
>> for 1.7 and 2.0 (at least, i think it's simon - whoever it is, what 
>> not
>> create a user profile then we'll all know).
>
> Yep, that's me. I see that some WIKI edits come up with the name of the
> person doing it, but I haven't been able to figure out how to do that.
> I can't see any "login" or "create account" or similar options anywhere
> on the MoinMoin pages. Can you point me in the right direction?

you sign in by clicking on the user preferences.

<snip>

>> since this is
>> release is primarily aimed at helping downstream consumers by 
>> resolving
>> dependency issues (rather than one aimed at adding functionality) it'd
>> probably be a good idea to move quickly to take a release branch
>> containing the current code base so that the work for the meatier
>> release (with more functionality) can proceed in parallel with the
>> release process (that's usually a little drawn out).
>
> Well, there have been quite a few new features added in the last 12
> months, and very few bugs have surfaced to be fixed. So as the current
> release notes say it will be mostly a "feature" release if you use 
> HEAD.
> The existing CVS HEAD code is pretty stable and well tested, so I would
> definitely recommend releasing from HEAD.
>
> Having the new release reduce the dependencies will be nice.
>
> The only developers who have added features to Digester for a long 
> while
> have been you and I (with pushing from Remy and Emmanuel in places). 
> And
> despite that TODO list, I don't intend to tackle any of those for at
> least a month or so. So a separate branch for concurrent development 
> may
> not be necessary.

it's probably safest to use a release branch (since i'm not proposing 
to fix any bugs or do some of the other stuff that i'd usually do for a 
release). i plan to issue a release candidate for compatibility testing 
purposes, so releasing off HEAD would mean probably a code freeze of 
more than a week (which seems a bit long). using a release branch gives 
me more control and means we can start preparing for the bug 
fix/enhancements release whilst waiting for feedback on the release 
candidate.

>> if this seems like a good plan, i'll write it up (on the wiki) 
>> tomorrow
>> and move towards a vote on the plan pretty soon. as soon as we can
>> decide on the right number for the features release, i'll put an
>> outline release plan on the wiki.
>
> That's great.
>
> After an exchange of emails with Lars Kuehne I have decided to join in
> with his "clirr" project (http://clirr.sourceforge.net/) after all, so
> if I get *my* act together, we may even be able to include an API
> differences and binary compatibility report generated by "clirr".

cool

- robert


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


Mime
View raw message