Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cxf-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 87991 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2009 17:22:28 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 19 Jan 2009 17:22:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 45520 invoked by uid 500); 19 Jan 2009 17:22:27 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cxf-dev-archive@cxf.apache.org Received: (qmail 45491 invoked by uid 500); 19 Jan 2009 17:22:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cxf.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cxf.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cxf.apache.org Received: (qmail 45480 invoked by uid 99); 19 Jan 2009 17:22:27 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:22:27 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.79.199.57] (HELO server.dankulp.com) (64.79.199.57) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:22:17 +0000 Received: by server.dankulp.com (Postfix, from userid 5000) id 6884F2430024; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 12:21:55 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5-gr0 (2008-06-10) on server.dankulp.com X-Spam-Level: X-Msg-File: /tmp/mailfilter.5L58vrWfKI Received: from sl-shenderson.americas.progress.com (c-24-91-141-225.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [24.91.141.225]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by server.dankulp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DB76197C046; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 12:21:54 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Kulp To: dev@cxf.apache.org Subject: Re: propagation of trunk commits to 2.0.x-fixes Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 12:21:53 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: "Eoghan Glynn" References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200901191221.53420.dkulp@apache.org> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Old-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_PBL, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL,RDNS_DYNAMIC autolearn=no version=3.2.5-gr0 On Monday 19 January 2009 5:41:30 am Eoghan Glynn wrote: > Folks, > > Are commits to trunk still propagated to 2.0.x-fixes, or is it just > 2.1.x-fixes that's actively maintained now? I've been doing SOME merging of stuff to 2.0.x to keep the option of a 2.0.10 open. It's just hasn't been a high priority as it seems most folks have transitioned to 2.1.x fairly successfully. The main places I see that may warrant a 2.0.10 would be: 1) any critical showstoppers and/or security issues found, obviously. 2) Major integration "partners" - things like ServiceMix, Camel, Geronimo, etc... If they need some fixes for their older supported versions based on 2.0.x, it's probably good to provide it. 3) If some users bug us enough, that would show some demand. Also, some of the stuff I'm working on is for customers/clients of Progress and some of them may demand backporting of fixes to older versions. Likewise, other commiters may have similar commitments. They may not result in releases being required here, but getting the fixes there so if we DO want to do a release is a good thing. In any case, I think the 2.0.x series should transition to a more "on demand" release schedule of fixes instead of the set timeframe type thing. Or, if we want to do timeframe, maybe extend the timeframe out to once a quarter or similar. What are other peoples thoughts? -- Daniel Kulp dkulp@apache.org http://dankulp.com/blog