geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jarek Gawor <jga...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Geronimo release cycle
Date Wed, 28 Mar 2012 17:00:25 GMT
I consider the changes made in trunk quite substantial so I think I
would call trunk 4.x and call beta branch 3.x.

Jarek

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Russell E Glaue <rglaue@cait.org> wrote:
>> move current trunk to 3.1 and change current beta branch to 3.0.
> +1
>
> As long as 3.0-beta-2 passes Java EE 1.6 tests and also provides no broken
> core/primary functionality we have 2.2, we should stamp it as 3.0.
>
> 3.1 can focus on the continuation of 3.x enhancements.
>
> -RG
>
>
>
> On 03/28/2012 06:46 AM, Forrest Xia wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Shawn Jiang <genspring@gmail.com
>> <mailto:genspring@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>    1.x   J2EE 1.4
>>    2.0   Java EE 1.5
>>    2.1  Java EE 1.5
>>    2.2   Java EE 1.5
>>    3.0   Java EE 1.6
>>
>>    Considering the previous practice, we'd better to move current trunk to
>> 3.1
>>    and change current beta branch to 3.0.
>>
>> Sounds good. Any more idea?
>>
>>
>>    On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Forrest Xia <forrestxm@gmail.com
>>    <mailto:forrestxm@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>        Saw this query, have an idea about the current release roadmap.
>>
>>        1. Can we move the current incomplete trunk work to version 4 of
>> geronimo?
>>        2. Rename 3.0-beta branch as the formal 3.0 release?
>>
>>        Any thoughts?
>>
>>        Forrest
>>
>>        ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>        From: *Arsen Abdrakhmanov* <arsen.abdrakhmanov@gmail.com
>>        <mailto:arsen.abdrakhmanov@gmail.com>>
>>        Date: Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:20 PM
>>        Subject: Geronimo release cycle
>>        To: user@geronimo.apache.org <mailto:user@geronimo.apache.org>
>>
>>
>>        Dear Geronimo Team,
>>
>>        Actually, I am the fan of geronimo for more than 5 years already.
>>        For the moment, I am promoting the usage of Geronimo as a platform
>> for
>>        non-critical applications in our company (banking industry in KZ).
>>        According to our company's internal policy, only official releases
>> of
>>        open-source software products can be used for internal
>> applications.
>>
>>        Currently, the release cycle for Geronimo is about an year or even
>>        longer, so it takes significant amount of time before we could use
>> an
>>        updated version of software with bug fixes and enhancements.
>>
>>        Taking that into account, can you give any information on your
>> plans to
>>        accelerate the release cycle for new versions of Geronimo?
>>
>>        I think, it would be very useful for the whole geronimo user
>> community,
>>        if the releases were published at least semi-anually.
>>        Hope, it can also increase the popularity of Geronimo among other
>>        application servers.
>>
>>        Best regards,
>>        Arsen Abdrakhmanov
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>        --
>>        Thanks!
>>
>>        Regards, Forrest
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    --
>>    Shawn
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Regards, Forrest
>>
>

Mime
View raw message