Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of mcintyre.a@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.200.175 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=wx1eN5HQebDT2FgRcgpdLJIyom5Zhj5QsNjV/KU19R+nwGTPrBC0dpzwWFJeWswSYRdjwCCRquaWeyHdcgw1h+Ox6GN/7QvPBHdDUY1KfnVmnsuuVAPfn05WoRinLvzJnICesggcEtCxamMnWPX1tKi4QT5ZV/IICkek/a7mNLE=
Message-ID: <54ac72d70804281822x7c24547y8da88da7590e1373@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:22:39 -0700
From: "Andrew McIntyre" <mcintyre.a@gmail.com>
To: derby-dev@db.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Proposal for Review] The fix for DERBY-3347 is important enough
 for the Development Community to issue a recommendation the User Community to
 upgrade.
In-Reply-To: <48166A67.5010709@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <48166A67.5010709@gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Stanley Bradbury
<Stan.Bradbury@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Would a PMC member volunteer to sponsor this post?  Having an acknowledged
> leader of the development community would give the recommendation more
> weight in many circles.
>  Can the recommendation, if posted, be identified as being made by or at
> least supported by the Development Community or a majority of the
> Development Community?  Again this would give more weight and bring more
> attention to the recommendation.  As currently worded the recommendation has
> no author other than the sender of the message.

I think this is a very good idea. I also think that a 10.3 release
might be in order, and it would make sense to include a statement like
this in the announcement that is sent out for the release. Last I
checked, the 10.3 branch had accumulated almost 90 fixes, and there
has been more than one request from the user community for a new 10.3
release.

I've been sort of curious about whether the release process has gotten
more or less lightweight with the recent changes, I'll see if I can
throw together a 10.3.3 release in my spare time in the next couple of
days unless someone else beats me to it. I'll start a separate thread
about that.

andrew