maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Connolly <>
Subject Re: voting was: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.0-alpha-5
Date Thu, 26 Nov 2009 06:39:03 GMT
2009/11/26 Paul Benedict <>:
> I would also like to contribute my frustration with the current build
> process. It's great the alpha releases are coming out often, but I
> cannot possibly be testing them at the frequency you guys are
> currently tagging and voting. I thought the "once a week" alpha was a
> good idea until it actually happened. If you guys voted once every
> three weeks, it would be much easier for me to participate. I wonder
> if others believe the same.

IMHO, once a week vs once every three weeks makes little difference.
The important metric is is the next release X bugs better than the
last release.

Personally, if at least 5 bugs have been fixed and it has been at
least 1 week since the last alpha, I say run a release again
especially given that running a release of a 3.0-alpha seems to be so
much easier. These are alpha's, we have a great IT framework (thanks
to benjamin), so voting +1 has got to be easier.  If you don't feel
like testing every release, test every other release and only vote
only for those you feel comfortable voting for (i.e. you tested)

> Paul
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Jason van Zyl <> wrote:
>> Let's not beat the dead horse. No one cares. There's not good reason for not
>> releasing something immediately if there are fixes available. That's just
>> not the way it works here, that's fine and not a big deal.
>> On 2009-11-25, at 7:52 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>> On 26/11/2009, at 6:24 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>> If ever we really needed to push out builds more frequently I would just
>>>> do it from Sonatype. I've given up trying to be truly agile at Apache, it's
>>>> just not going to happen.
>>> I don't understand what the issue is with the current process. Benjamin is
>>> already getting them out faster than the majority of people will be able to
>>> test and review them. Any faster and you might as well just be using the CI
>>> builds for whatever purpose you have in mind. You're not going to be able to
>>> push out anything from Sonatype that's any more official than those, so what
>>> benefit does anyone get from a build that loses the frequency of CI builds
>>> and loses the benefit of being reviewed before publishing?
>>> The rules about not promoting snapshots to users are there for good
>>> reasons - to make sure the PMC does actually authorize releases and the
>>> users know what they are getting, and to encourage actually doing releases
>>> (instead of everyone running their own version of trunk). I don't see any
>>> upside to a change that loses those. There's no problem pointing individuals
>>> to the grid for *testing* purposes as far as I know, as long as they know
>>> what they are getting is not a release and may not work at all.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Brett
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> Thanks,
>> Jason
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder,  Apache Maven
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message