Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAB917R+BW+hhbHe00z8XSHDmhkt2uVPrdqwkxviFjOL=MF4SPQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAB917R+BW+hhbHe00z8XSHDmhkt2uVPrdqwkxviFjOL=MF4SPQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2016 13:02:53 -0700
Message-ID: <CACZkXPy8i03X6WC6YnN=eYxbvkNwvPSu5DWz0sMrMyrKxrVrTA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [BCEL] 5.3 is going to be messy
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1141bdced50e2c0534a18ef6
archived-at: Mon, 06 Jun 2016 20:02:59 -0000

--001a1141bdced50e2c0534a18ef6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Benedikt Ritter <britter@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I had a brief look at the state of BCEL wrt doing a last 5.x release. Well,
> it feels like that is going to be a mess:
>
> - We have @since 6.0 annotations all over the code.
> - We have same deprecated classes - why if the code is currently in the
> shape for the 6.0 release, there should be no deprecated stuff
> - We have chances.xml which are talking about the next big 6.0 release.
> - We have renamed package coordinates which make it hard to generate a
> Clirr report.
>
> This will all have to be resolved before we can do the 5.3 release. I'm
> currently wondering what might be the best way to push out the 5.x release.
> I think we should create the 5.x branch ASAP, so that the way is free for
> work on the important stuff in trunk. Hopefully this will enable us to
> implement the missing bits for Java 8 support and get the 6.0 release out
> of the door soon.
>
> Thoughts?
>

It seems like we are stuck in the middle b/w 6.0 and 5.3.

How about letting bcel6 stand and finish 6.0? This makes Sebb's recent work
a bit of a waste but might make migrating from 5.2 easier anyway.

We can do the best we can for bcel6. We can do more clean ups and so on.

Some users will migrate, others can be asked to provide patches to 5.2 for
a 5.3.

Then we can gather patches for a 100% BC 5.3. If 5.2 users care that much
for 5.2 instead of migrating, I would help that they would be ready to step
in with patches.

Gary


> Benedikt
>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--001a1141bdced50e2c0534a18ef6--