db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tiago Espinha <ti...@espinhas.net>
Subject Re: DERBY-4331 and the 10.5.2.0 release
Date Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:36:42 GMT
In my opinion we'd have a mix of both options. We could keep 10.5.2.0 on the
site just for history's sake and introduce the 10.5.2.1 at the same time,
with the DERBY-4331 fix.
I'm just suggesting this because it seems a little extreme to bump the
version up to 10.5.3 with virtually no relevant changes other than
DERBY-4331.

Tiago

On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Kathey Marsden
<kmarsdenderby@sbcglobal.net>wrote:

> Dag H. Wanvik wrote:
>
>> Myrna van Lunteren <m.v.lunteren@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>> I personally don't care for a release that has either DERBY-3926 or
>>> DERBY-4331 in it.
>>>
>>>
>> Now that we have fixes  for both DERBY-3926 and DERBY4331 in the trunk.  I
> hope we can restart this discussion with better options, which hopefully
> will avoid the need for the funny JavaDB non-fork fork.     Current options
> as I see them. 1) Pull 10.5.2.0 off the website, cut 10.5.2.1 with the fix
> and short vote with Rick as release manager.
> 2) Move 10.5.2.0 down to the deprecated section.  cut 10.5.3.0 with short
> vote with Rick as release manager.
>
> I think I prefer option 2 as we don't try to erase the history of the vote
> or the release being on the website, but I can accept either approach.
>
> Kathey
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message