Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of ammulder@gmail.com designates
 64.233.184.233 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=nOXTx1ThqRgrV9CSfEOVpuAcK6NKsPcjO8XiPmMEgipQcFXoQepRiNGHRC5WDSdhZO1FqUGRayWrMCYqLl+1QTK0bM2Ubj2gIDpLKBc9SCRsYimcHohmpH+FlW6ZENFTP/NxEPKRaP6z5YeDkxiDP7qoBlbbvF07sm9lmfxzFyY=
Message-ID: <74e15baa0606151539h5148b630u6d57512ba6ad4f30@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:39:39 -0400
From: "Aaron Mulder" <ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu>
Sender: ammulder@gmail.com
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: Where did the 1.1 branch go?!?!
In-Reply-To: <4491CEC9.7020407@toolazydogs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <74e15baa0606150827j6196a402we1da1711e48f6dee@mail.gmail.com>
	 <74e15baa0606150840m7e9ccd67u80973c36c9729a51@mail.gmail.com>
	 <82686663-C980-4781-B0A4-54F94874672F@visi.com>
	 <449191B3.2090307@yahoo.com>
	 <C0D039EA-7BD3-4CDF-BAA2-DA89734D154D@yahoo.com>
	 <4491A492.80000@toolazydogs.com>
	 <FF061E0F-D638-4A5B-A512-98A232BB641C@visi.com>
	 <4491AD28.7050600@toolazydogs.com>
	 <1361D50A-C8B4-40BB-9173-BA612BD2D733@visi.com>
	 <4491CEC9.7020407@toolazydogs.com>

On 6/15/06, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
> > Then you both missed the beginning of this thread where Aaron was
> > saying "i want to update branches/1.1 with a fix for 1.1.1, where did
> > it go?"  The issue is, we haven't released 1.1 yet and no one should
> > be updating that source till then.
> >
> > Hence the idea to copy 1.1 aside as 1.1.0 so the activities of
> > creating, voting, and shipping 1.1 (which take about a week) could
> > happen in parallel to bug fixing 1.1.1.
>
> That sounds really dangerous to me.
>
> We're adding fixes to a release that hasn't gone out yet?

You're acting like this doesn't happen?  Here are two 1.1 issues that
I was asked to defer to 1.1.1:

 * Can't add new configuration options to the security realm console
portlet via plugins (login module configuration settings should be
dynamic not in properties file or hardcoded)
 * Can't add new JMS providers to the JMS resource console portlet via
plugins (JMS provider settings should be dynamic not in properties
file or hardcoded)

I've been sitting on these two changes for more than a week, and we're
still a ways away from a release.

I also posted 5 fairly significant bugs as known issues for the 1.1
release.  It would sure be nice if those could be fixed in SVN even if
it's before the official 1.1 release goes out.

Thanks,
     Aaron