Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4489183D.5040507@worldonline.fr>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 08:42:05 +0200
From: Guillaume Nodet <guillaume.nodet@worldonline.fr>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: 1.1 Release plan
References: <4488E995.6090502@hogstrom.org>
In-Reply-To: <4488E995.6090502@hogstrom.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Matt Hogstrom wrote:

> Final Items for 1.1
>
> I would like to release Geronimo 1.1 on June 12th.  Yes, that is three 
> days away.  If we can't make that date then it will be 72 hours away 
> from each candidate build.  Problem that are found need to be 
> addressed if they are deemed critical.  Otherwise they will be tracked 
> and solved in a follow on release.
>
> That said.  I sent a note earlier today announcing the freeze to 
> branches/1.1.  Changes to this branch should be limited to bug fixes 
> only.  The little changes are the ones that generally burn you.  At 
> 1400 ET the Inn is closed and I will spin up a release that will be 
> our release candidate.
>
> The issues that have been raised from the previous build were 
> Guillaume's observation of the problem when running  Geronimo under 
> CygWin as well as the license and Notice issues.
>
> Since Geronimo is a multifaceted project there are several things that 
> need to be voted on.  They are Geronimo itself, the specification jars 
> and DayTrader.  Geronimo itself is the significant component that will 
> carry the other items so I believe a vote for Geronimo in this context 
> is a vote for all three items.
>
> *There is a concern about the specification jars*
> David Jencks raised this issue in another note on the list.  The jars 
> have not been released but they have had a tag cut and the resulting 
> compilation has been placed on http://people.apache.org/repository.
>
> One of the issues I found with the spec is that there are different 
> spec releases in the 1_1 tag.  I would prefer that all jars have the 
> same version suffix.  Right now it includes 1.0, 1.0.1, 1.1 and 
> others.  I think this is confusing.  We release Geronimo with all the 
> same module versions even if nothing has changed.  I would like to 
> move that we recut a 1_2 tag with all spec jars having a 1.2 suffix.

I will add the NOTICE and LICENSE files so that they are included in the 
spec jars.
This is mandatory for publicly available jars (so afaik, all).

Specs jars are built with m2 and this i svery important that they are 
available in a m2 repo.

>
> *DayTrader*
> Day Trader is currently a 1.1-SNAPSHOT as well.  We will release the 
> DayTrader Ear (separate from Geronimo) as a 1.1 version as well.  This 
> way the build will be in sync.
>
> *Issues*
> 1. It was noted earlier today that there is a problem with Geronimo 
> under CygWin.  Guillaume noted that an issue exists where a file is 
> not renamed (config.xml).  Given that CygWin is a hybrid environment I 
> think we should investigate this problem but not hold up the release.

I have tested under cygwin.  I will try with plain windows command line, 
but I fear this is the same problem.
I will update the JIRA accordingly.

>
> 2. Guillaume also pointed out the lack of a License and Notices file.  
> I will include the two files from the SVN geronimo/branches/1.1 in the 
> build tomorrow.

I will add the in the META-INF directory for all geronimo jars (not sure 
if it can be done for car files, though)

Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet

>
> 3. Numerous bug fixes are being addressed.  Excellent.
>
> Apart from Spec issue above I think we have most everything 
> addressed.  Does this list of outstanding items and release plan make 
> sense?
>
> Matt
>
>