On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Shawn Jiang <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> 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?


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Arsen Abdrakhmanov <arsen.abdrakhmanov@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:20 PM
Subject: Geronimo release cycle
To: 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


Regards, Forrest



Regards, Forrest