geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sergey Elin" <eli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Release Early, Release Often
Date Fri, 08 Sep 2006 06:49:51 GMT
I think it is good idea! ;)

2006/9/7, Jeff Genender <jgenender@apache.org>:
>
> We kind of discussed this before...
>
> But why not have the automated nightly build from trunk?
>
> Jason Dillon wrote:
> > I am thinking about an 1.2-alpha release, which does not need to pass
> > any tck, but can still be downloaded by folks that want to test their
> > apps on the bleeding edge (with out having to build).  While there is
> > nothing major from a J2EE perspective in the alpha, a lot has changed,
> > or will change very shortly.  Here is a list with comments of new and
> > upcoming stuff:
> >
> > ActiveMQ 4.1, is about to get committed.
> >
> > Derby is about to get upgraded.
> >
> > Log4j is about to get upgraded.
> >
> > Use of concurrent util is about to get changed to
> backport-concurrent-util.
> >
> > Lets not forget that we changed the build system, which mostly impacts
> > development, but also has an impact on the configuration files, and
> > plugins... new CAR m2 plugin.  I think it would be really good to get an
> > alpha out so that people can easily test and provide feedback.
> >
> > New m2 plugin to start/stop Geronimo, soon to have new deploy goals.
> >
> > A bunch of bug fixes.
> >
> >  * * *
> >
> > I think that by releasing a 1.2-alpha, that we also start down the path
> > of changing the perception of how quickly we release.  The alpha can
> > also serve to help us get some experience using the m2 release plugin so
> > that when it comes time for a non-alpha/beta release that we have
> > confidence in the procedure... and this will give us time to make sure
> > that we have the right configurations and setup to make a release with
> > relative ease.
> >
> > Also, more of a side effect, by making a new release, it helps control
> > the JIRA roadmap, right now 1.2 is filled with a bunch of build system
> > related fluff and other bits...
> >
> > I think that we have enough changes (or soon to change in the next days
> > or so) to warrant an alpha.  I don't see any reason why not to... we
> > don't need to spend days/weeks to ensure the TCK passes, because we
> > don't need to run it.  It should be sufficient to vote on an alpha and
> > then cut the release, which should be easy with the maven release
> > plugin, and even easier with my gpg-sign'ing mojo to sign and upload all
> > artifacts.
> >
> > I believe that having this alpha out will benefit our community, showing
> > that we are going to start releasing more often, give people a chance to
> > provide feedback more often an earlier.
> >
> > I certainly do not expect any production customers to use this, but I do
> > expect that app developers will, so they can ready their apps for
> > deployment on the platform.  We will clearly label this as an alpha
> > release, and clear state that it has not been TCK certified.
> >
> > I don't see any downside to cutting a release off of trunk soonish, in
> > the next week or so.
> >
> > --jason
> >
> >
> > On Sep 6, 2006, at 9:13 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Sep 5, 2006, at 4:40 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> >>
> >>> According to our STATUS file, our last feature release (1.1) was on
> >>> 2006-06-26 which is about 2.5 months ago.  I'm not sure exactly what
> >>> we have in trunk right now, but I'd guess we most likely have enough
> >>> to do a release right now.   I'm going to spend a few hours today
> >>> browsing the JIRAs and SVN logs and compile a list of the features we
> >>> have in trunk right now. Anyways, I'll let you know what I find and
> >>> we can figure out what we want to do.
> >>
> >> I'd be interested to hear more concretely what's in Geronimo trunk,
> >> OpenEJB 2.2, etc that's not in 1.1.1...
> >>
> >> --kevan
>

Mime
View raw message