From dev-return-50655-apmail-geronimo-dev-archive=geronimo.apache.org@geronimo.apache.org Sat Jun 02 14:53:23 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 8653 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2007 14:53:21 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Jun 2007 14:53:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 94503 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jun 2007 14:53:24 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 93935 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jun 2007 14:53:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 93918 invoked by uid 99); 2 Jun 2007 14:53:23 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 02 Jun 2007 07:53:23 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of jgawor@gmail.com designates 209.85.146.176 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.146.176] (HELO wa-out-1112.google.com) (209.85.146.176) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 02 Jun 2007 07:53:17 -0700 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k17so1114582waf for ; Sat, 02 Jun 2007 07:52:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=UpGoiC3xh4SB3gngVr9OxdvxbbzPxuWoGCP2WwXQi23K6ppS2XrECXrd8wYbSniwbNYjrHeHisWkZJ2qbu09cn1NpopdvAle2MDDbFf4YVT+6JkfNrB4ysKm3dM9AejgfeEbXkkdFKm6IV+2HlXrL189kJJBVIThORxWmKYRXa8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=aGiKp5ci7C+pr5z0A3viik9Gum/N6EkP2P8DXW7Wd6gsLktsklMhhhxi9GJR6rDif8vfh3y2q3KHK41bpIzAul71ot7rMiGFGbbKQsZIGktlrgd0n/lsyYm0dM03IKZ839BTuynQ2hvCp79+FJxJ6jBmtiUFklrn9HrCc85/jDw= Received: by 10.114.130.1 with SMTP id c1mr2949665wad.1180795977167; Sat, 02 Jun 2007 07:52:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.60.17 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Jun 2007 07:52:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5eb405c70706020752y33f7bed0o609864733259b89e@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2007 10:52:57 -0400 From: "Jarek Gawor" To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: Nearing testing complete ... what should the release name be and next steps In-Reply-To: <2AACD85E-7CBA-476E-8412-DC5294B6FA43@hogstrom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <142B33E9-75F1-4D8B-B517-89B3E8BD155D@hogstrom.org> <36E88A63-2A2C-49A8-B4DC-A263B38CD2A7@yahoo.com> <313CC370-B93E-4D22-8393-F5E66666E431@hogstrom.org> <5eb405c70706012029q774ae169vcd73dd30d20380a9@mail.gmail.com> <2AACD85E-7CBA-476E-8412-DC5294B6FA43@hogstrom.org> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Maybe I misunderstood your initial message but I thought you wanted to create 'branches/2.0' branch and not 'branches/2.0-M6' branch. Branching for M6 as usual sounds fine to me. Jarek On 6/2/07, Matt Hogstrom wrote: > Branching for a 2.0-M6 is a short lived process and basically what > we've done over the past few months. I'll branch, fix up / clean up > and andy patches there will be small and easily managed in two > branches. This isn't intended to be a long lived maintenance > problem. We've been there and done that and don't plan on returning. > > On Jun 1, 2007, at 11:29 PM, Jarek Gawor wrote: > > > One thing I would be in favor of is branching only when we are > > actually ready for 2.0 final. Otherwise, we will have two trees to > > commit our patches to and keep in synch. And that is always > > problematic. > > > > Jarek > > > > On 6/1/07, Matt Hogstrom wrote: > >> I like Kevan's suggestion. We ship the assemblies we normally build. > >> > >> > >> On Jun 1, 2007, at 8:28 PM, Gianny Damour wrote: > >> > >> > On 01/06/2007, at 3:56 AM, 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 am also in favor of a simultaneous release of Jetty and Tomcat > >> > assemblies. > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Gianny > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> > >> >>> 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. > >> >> > >> >> thanks > >> >> david jencks > >> >> > >> >>> Matt > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >