cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From mattrpav <>
Subject Re: Options for CXF 2.1.....
Date Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:38:43 GMT

I like Option 1.  At this point, most CXF users aren't afraid of the
'incubator' tag, and it will make for a better non-incubator release when
more folks have used 2.1.

Matt Pavlovich 

dkulp wrote:
> With the 2.1 open jira list steadily declining, we're definitely getting 
> closer to the release.   Thus, I wanted to discuss some options around 
> releasing it.  The graduation vote/proceedings could have an impact 
> which is why I'd like to discuss this.   If the graduation vote proceeds 
> well (it looks OK as of right now), it could be presented to the board 
> on April 16 so releases after that could be full "non incubator" 
> releases.  (assuming the board OK's the graduation, it doesn't get 
> delayed due to time constraints, etc...)
> Option 1: 
> Stick to March 30 date to release 2.1.   Then fix whatever bugs are found 
> and such and do a 2.1.1 non-incubator shortly after graduation.   This 
> definitely gets things into the users hands sooner, but would still 
> require the double vote (cxf-dev + incubator) for 2.1.  
> Option 2:
> Delay the full 2.1 release until graduation and make 2.1 itself the "Hey, 
> we're no longer incubating" release.   The issue here is if the 
> graduation proposal gets pushed back to may or something (like the 
> ServiceMix resolution got delayed a month), we could have done the 30th 
> release.
> If we go option 2, I'd like to do one or two unofficial tagged "beta" 
> builds before now and then to get people looking at it more.   
> (actually, even with Option 1, I will probably do a beta build on friday 
> to test to make sure the release process still works with all the 
> modules and stuff added to 2.1.   I don't want to be 
> running "release:prepare" on the 30th and find out it doesn't work.)
> In BOTH cases, I'd probably be targetting a 2.0.6 release shortly after 
> the graduation as well so we can get 2.0.x maven artifacts into central.
> Anyway, what are peoples thoughts?
> -- 
> J. Daniel Kulp
> Principal Engineer, IONA

View this message in context:
Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at

View raw message