james-mime4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niklas Therning <nik...@trillian.se>
Subject Re: about mime4j 0.6.1 plan
Date Mon, 27 Dec 2010 17:30:00 GMT
Personally I'm fine with just the MIME4J-138 changes which has been 
committed in the branch already.

/Niklas

On 12/27/2010 05:22 PM, Norman Maurer wrote:
> Ok.. anything else you want to change before I prepare for the vote ?
>
> Bye,
> Norman
>
>
> 2010/12/27 Niklas Therning<niklas@trillian.se>:
>> That would be great!
>>
>> On 12/27/2010 08:49 AM, Norman Maurer wrote:
>>> Yes, the maven release plugin will help...  Should I take care and act
>>> as release manager ?
>>>
>>> Bye
>>> Norman
>>>
>>>
>>> Am Montag, 27. Dezember 2010 schrieb Niklas Therning<niklas@trillian.se>:
>>>> Should we start a formal vote on this one?
>>>>
>>>> /Niklas
>>>>
>>>> On 12/17/2010 02:21 PM, Norman Maurer wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1,
>>>> Norman
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2010/12/17 Niklas Therning<niklas@trillian.se>:
>>>>
>>>> I just committed the MIME4J-138 changes to the 0.6 bug fix branch.
>>>>
>>>> +1 from me on releasing 0.6.1 with only MIME4J-138 as changes.
>>>>
>>>> /Niklas
>>>>
>>>> On 12/17/2010 10:43 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I just had a quick review of the issues fixed in 0.7 and I didn't find
>>>> other issues (apart MIME4J-138) to be backported. Most of the other
>>>> bugfix/improvements requires bigger refactorings and they are not
>>>> critical as MIME4J-138.
>>>>
>>>> So maybe we should simply push 0.6.1 with only MIME4J-138 as changes.
>>>> Is there anything else we should put in 0.6.1 before attempting a
>>>> release?
>>>>
>>>> Stefano
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>


Mime
View raw message