maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <>
Subject Re: Maven 2.1.0 GA Plan
Date Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:51:50 GMT
The question is at what point do you say "no new stuff" on 2.1?  IMO, 
there needs to be a fair amount of time for "unstable" things to be 
introduced in 2.1 before a formal release is made.  In other words, I'd 
like to see a process where we have a branch that is stable and a branch 
in "development mode". When the development mode branch is marked stable 
a new development branch should be created. At the same time the old 
stable branch should be retired.  Thus the length of time a branch is in 
development mode should be long enough that the stable branches have a 
reasonable life span.

In short, I like the milestone approach as it is a clear signal to users 
that things are somewhat subject to change.


Brian E. Fox wrote:
> We've come this far, why not make 2.1.0 right now as we were doing
> 2.0.10? I don't see any benefit to waiting longer. Just do it and then
> we can start adding more things to 2.1.1 or 2.2
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Casey [] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 6:29 PM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Maven 2.1.0 GA Plan
> Hi everyone,
> So, it seems that we're all in agreement about the rough outline for 
> 2.1.x and beyond. I've renamed the current RC branch to be 2.1.0-M1-RC 
> to make this the first milestone toward some as-yet-undetermined feature
> list for 2.1.0.
> So, let's talk about that feature list. From earlier comments, I've 
> gathered that the following may be good targets to include for 2.1.0:
> - Dan's reactor changes
> - Parallel downloads
> - PGP stuff
> - MNG-624 and related issues/feature enhancements (parent versioning, 
> right?)
> What I don't know is what state of maturity each of these is in, and on 
> what timeline they can be stabilized. Do the relevant developers have 
> enough time to finish implementing, testing, and documenting each 
> feature, so we could get a 2.1.0 GA out in, say 6 weeks or so? Maybe a 
> better approach would be to try for a new milestone release that 
> contains the final result of each new feature (with latent parts of the 
> rest, as we work on them), such that the 2.1.0 GA will contain all the 
> new features in their complete forms, with any regressions identified 
> fixed and incorporated?
> I haven't found the pertinent Confluence pages describing the above 
> features yet...maybe they don't exist or maybe I haven't looked hard 
> enough yet, but we'll need to collect the list somewhere that we can 
> make it public going forward, and then publish that release plan URL on 
> the Maven site.
> Are there other things that we can fit into this sort of timeframe? Is 
> this too much? It's my strong preference that we try to cap this release
> cycle at two months, so I guess this means taking the list of "nearly 
> there" features and determining whether we'll have the time to stabilize
> them for inclusion, given our current availability.
> Of course, once we settle the 2.1.0 release plan, we can start talking 
> about what we're going to do for 2.2, 2.3, etc. As long as we keep 
> things rolling, there's no reason anyone needs to feel overly rushed 
> about getting a particular feature in a particular should 
> NOT be your only chance. :-)
> What does anyone else think?
> -john

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message