ibatis-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Brandon Goodin" <brandon.goo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Status of 2.3 Release
Date Sat, 02 Dec 2006 09:01:32 GMT
I think that would be good (of course) :D.

Brandon

On 12/1/06, Clinton Begin <clinton.begin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> That's a great point.  I've had similar discussions.
>
> How about this:  Let's do the vote for 2.2. GA right now.  Assuming it
> passes (I don't see why not considering how long it's been out), we update
> 2.1.7 to 2.2 on the website by Monday.
>
> Then, next Friday (7 days) we start the vote for 2.3 GA and give it 7 more
> days to settle.  Within two weeks we'll have a 2.2 and a 2.3 GA.
>
> I agree that we should probably GA 2.2 because people are already using
> it, but also because it's the last DAO release...that way we have a GA'd
> final DAO.
>
> Sound good?
>
> Clinton
>
> On 12/1/06, Brandon Goodin <brandon.goodin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm fine with pushing 2.3. But, I had a conversation on the list with
> > someone who feared upgrading to 2.2 because it wasn't GA. This was,
> > apparently, a company policy. They need a feature that is available in
> > 2.2 but will not upgrade because it is not GA. If we do not make 2.2 GA
> > then their company policy will continue to hold them up. I guess I don't see
> > a reason why we wouldn't make it GA. It has been available for some time
> > with fewer bugs than 2.1.7. If I were to blow off any release I'd blow
> > off 2.1.7 because it conatins more bugs than 2.2.
> >
> > Brandon
> >
> > On 12/1/06, Clinton Begin <clinton.begin@gmail.com > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > My vote is to leave it the way it is.  My conservative, pragmatic and
> > > adventurous sides are all satisfied by having a single GA release as well as
> > > the latest "Beta" release available for download.  2.2 is available in
> > > the past releases if people want it.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Clinton
> > >
> > > On 12/1/06, Jeff Butler < jeffgbutler@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I forgot about that conversation, I was thinking of this one:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@ibatis.apache.org/msg01855.html
> > > >
> > > > A great example of selective memory on my part :)
> > > >
> > > > Anyway I'm open to a GA vote for 2.2 if we need to.  But maybe we
> > > > should let the dust settle on 2.3 for a few days.  If it looks like
> > > > it will fly, then we could do the 2.3 GA vote a little sooner.  The
> > > > major thing in 2.3 was prepared statement caching and I know there's
> > > > already been some public testing of it.  Most of the fixes I did were
for
> > > > esoteric issues.  I think 2.3 is pretty solid.
> > > >
> > > > Your thoughts - should I post the 2.2 build to the mirrors?  That
> > > > wouldn't take much effort now that I know how to sign releases (it was
a
> > > > strange trip into command line hacker heaven).
> > > >
> > > > Jeff Butler
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 12/1/06, Clinton Begin <clinton.begin@gmail.com > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > To clarify, what I suggested a week or so ago was:
> > > > >
> > > > > "We can vote for GA anytime, even after another release makes it
> > > > > to GA.  The beta, alpha, GA status is always flexible.  We could
vote for GA
> > > > > on 2.2. right now actually. "
> > > > >
> > > > > So a little closer to what Brandon is suggesting.  However, I'm
> > > > > more interested in leaving 2.1.7 and 2.2 in the past and getting
> > > > > 2.3 to GA.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Clinton
> > > > >
> > > > > On 12/1/06, Jeff Butler <jeffgbutler@gmail.com > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We discussed this some weeks ago.  IIRC, Clinton wanted to do
a
> > > > > > new release rather than voting for GA on 2.2.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jeff Butler
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 12/1/06, Brandon Goodin <brandon.goodin@gmail.com >
wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Curious why we are superceding 2.2 wit 2.3? 2.2 has been
> > > > > > > available for some time and contains several bug fixes
over
> > > > > > > 2.1.7. I would also say that 2.2.0 could be made GA. The
other
> > > > > > > thought is that there is no guarantee that 2.3 will be
GA
> > > > > > > quality after we get it out there for 2 weeks, however
unlikely that may be.
> > > > > > > Thanks for getting this all together!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > B
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 11/30/06, Jeff Butler <jeffgbutler@gmail.com >
wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have everything built for 2.3, and have everything
signed
> > > > > > > > and checksummed.  Unfortunately, there are permission
problems in the
> > > > > > > > .../dist directories, so I'm stuck right now.  I've
sent a note to infra@
> > > > > > > > and as soon as they get the permission problems resolved,
then I'll be able
> > > > > > > > to publish the release.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This will be the first iBATIS/Java release that uses
the
> > > > > > > > Apache mirroring structure - I'm going to implement
the new Apache release
> > > > > > > > policy according to the notice the committers received
a couple of weeks
> > > > > > > > ago.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My release plan looks like this:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. Post the 2.3 and 2.1.7 builds to the mirrors. 
2.3 will
> > > > > > > > superceed 2.2, so no need to post it
> > > > > > > > 2. Label 2.3 as beta, 2.1.7 is still the GA release
> > > > > > > > 3. Call for a vote for 2.3 GA two weeks after 2.3
is posted
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'll keep you posted - hopefully I'll get it done
tomorrow.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jeff Butler
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message