geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <>
Subject Re: Nearing testing complete ... what should the release name be and next steps
Date Fri, 01 Jun 2007 03:38:15 GMT

On May 31, 2007, at 1:56 PM, David Jencks wrote:

> On May 31, 2007, at 9:53 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>> There has been lots of work going on to get Geronimo 2.0 certified  
>> and it seems like the light at the end of the tunnel is not an  
>> oncoming train but the other side :)  With that we're also at the  
>> point of cutting a milestone since we're at the end of May.  Given  
>> that all possible assemblies won't be fully tested what do folks  
>> think about the name of the release and what will it contain?   
>> Also, when is a branch appropriate?
>> I was thinking geronimo-tomcat-jee5-2.0-M6.  This would include  
>> Tomcat, CXF and OpenJPA as the components.  The M6 indicates a  
>> work in progress but allows us to claim a specific release as  
>> certified and allows us to continue knocking off the corners for  
>> performance, footprint, etc.
> Why not also a jetty assembly?  Unless there are really significant  
> problems I'd be in favor of waiting a couple days and getting both  
> platforms out at the same time.

I'm good with an -M6. I would think we release our normal assemblies.  
We'd just advertise which assemblies had passed CTS. As new assembly  
combinations pass CTS, we can release new Mx's...

>> It would also seem about right to branch into branches/2.0 at this  
>> time as we finish the other work.
>> What do others think?
> I have a significant security refactoring I've been working on that  
> I would like to get into the next 2.0 official whatever (milestone,  
> snapshot, release...) since it is not backwards compatible.  It  
> affects how default subjects and run-as subjects are constructed  
> and will finish the JACC plugability work.  I'll try to get  
> something out today describing how it works in more detail.

Understand your concern. I'll look for your description. And will  
work to help you achieve it. However, I'm perfectly fine with a  
milestone release which is incompatible with the next milestone (or  
full) release.

IMO, there are a lot of people (yourself included) who have been  
doing some great work in Geronimo, OpenEJB, CXF, etc to get us to  
this point... IMO, they'll deserve a day in the sun to celebrate a  
bit. But after that *one* day in the sun ;-), we can continue working  
on resolving additional issues (e.g. Jetty), and work on polishing  
off a 2.0 release.


View raw message