isis-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Kevin Meyer" <>
Subject Re: Ready for a 1.9.0 release?
Date Sun, 16 Aug 2015 07:16:45 GMT
Hi Dan,

Excellent news - I'm planning on giving a presentation at work on the
latest Apache Isis, but I'm waiting until after the next release.

Question: Given the changes, shouldn't we release a major release (2.0.0)
[1]? The API certainly has changed since 1.7 (I call annotations part of
the API).

Re: your proposal for regular releases after this should be ok to push
enhancements out into non-snapshot release, my only concern is that
regularly releases should be OK as long as user devs developing with our
platform don't have to change any existing code.

It's OK if it's a bugfix/feature/enhancement that adds new functionality,
when user devs just add more code to access it - but I would be concerned
about monthly releases that require changes to code in production....

I'm interested in other opinions..


PS: The new asciidoc website looks really good!


On Sat, August 15, 2015 12:21, Dan Haywood wrote:
> Hi folks (send this to dev ML, cc'ing the users ML)
> Just to say that we're well overdue for a release - and I've well aware
> that Ive semi-promised to cut a release for several of the last months and
>  then not done so.
> So this is to say that I'm intending to cut a release next weekend (ie
> 22/23rd Aug), unless anyone in this coming week finds a show-stopper.
> I'd appreciate it if you could to upgrade to the latest snapshot (which
> includes moving up to the latest-n-greatest DN 4.1), and also (optionally)
>  to port your app to using the new AppManifest stuff (should simplify
> bootstrapping and long term maintainability).  The migration notes [1]
> should help
> ~~~
> And, after 1.9.0 is released, what do people think about moving to a more
> regular schedule, eg once every month?  I know that Apache Wicket and
> Apache Deltaspike are able to maintain this sort of schedule; our release
>  procedures are now reasonably well documented/automated [2] so I think
> it'd be good to follow this practice.  Thoughts?
> Thanks all
> Dan
> [1]
> _1.8.0-to-1.9.0
> [2]

Kevin Meyer
Ljubljana, Slovenia

View raw message