openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael Dick" <michael.d.d...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 1.0 steps?
Date Mon, 09 Jul 2007 19:02:43 GMT
Coming back for thirds?

I don't have a burning desire to do another release right now, but I'm happy
to help (if I can).

Two things to watch out for (some of which you probably knew already) :

* We should probably use the gpg maven plugin to sign all our build
artifacts. Near the end of the release cycle for 0.9.7 I found out that we
needed to sign everything - not just the binary jars. This is something I've
been meaning to commit but I haven't gotten around to it.

 * The process of copying a release from a staging area to the final maven
repository was a bit error prone. Jason gave me an early version of the
maven staging plugin, but after a quick google / look at the maven site it
didn't pop up. Maybe there's a better option available. If we get stuck I
still have a copy of what Jason sent me that I can get working again.

-Mike

On 7/9/07, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com> wrote:
>
> Second the motion!
>
> You did a great job last time around, and unless someone else has a
> burning desire to leap over the cliff with a hankie for a parachute,
> you're it.
>
> Craig
>
> On Jul 9, 2007, at 10:13 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >> We also need a release manager (a person who will do what Marc and
> >> Mike did for 0.9.6 and 0.9.7).
> >
> > Unless anyone else has a desire to do the 1.0.0 release, I'll
> > nominate myself, since I think I have a good idea about the things
> > that need to be changed in the build process to accommodate our TLP
> > status.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jul 9, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
> >
> >> I think we need to first go through the list of JIRA issues for
> >> 0.9.8 and 1.0.0 and really think hard about whether they should be
> >> fixed or not.
> >>
> >> We also need a release manager (a person who will do what Marc and
> >> Mike did for 0.9.6 and 0.9.7).
> >>
> >> Maybe we should post the list of proposed deferred JIRA issues for
> >> discussion and then move them. I like the idea of defining both a
> >> 1.0.1 and 1.1.0 release target to which to defer issues.
> >>
> >> I think once there is consensus on the non-deferred issues and an
> >> identified JIRA owner for them, the release manager can propose
> >> when to make a branch. Once the branch is cut, fixes would have to
> >> be made in both branch and trunk, so it's not a trivial decision.
> >>
> >> Maybe a wiki with a table of JIRA issues and proposed target
> >> release and some justification (with author's name) would be
> >> useful. It's not too hard to set up but still might not be worth
> >> the effort.
> >>
> >> Craig
> >>
> >> On Jul 9, 2007, at 9:50 AM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> What is remaining to get to a 1.0 release? Are there any things in
> >>>> particular that people think are important to work on? Maybe it's
> >>>> about time for us to create a branch for 1.0 finalization and
> >>>> hardening.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This probably depends on what our goal is for a 1.0 release.  If
> >>> it's just
> >>> to have a 1.0 release since we graduated to a TLP, then we're
> >>> probably close
> >>> to starting that process.  But, if we are looking for a certain
> >>> level and
> >>> hardness of function, then we still may have a fews things to
> >>> clean up.  I'm
> >>> okay with going for a 1.0 release just to have one, but I would
> >>> then like to
> >>> start working on defining the follow-on release (1.0.1 or 1.1).
> >>>
> >>> No matter what type of 1.0 release we decide to go for, maybe we
> >>> should
> >>> incorporate the voting mechanism within JIRA to help determine
> >>> what Issues
> >>> are important?  I am not totally familiar with this process, but
> >>> it allows
> >>> users to vote on the Issues that are most important to them.
> >>> Each user is
> >>> allowed a certain number of votes (to keep them from voting for
> >>> "all"
> >>> Issues).  We can use that as input to our selection criteria.
> >>>
> >>> But, before we open up for a vote, do we need some time to review
> >>> all of the
> >>> open Issues and assert 1.0 vs post-1.0?  Something along the
> >>> lines of what
> >>> Patrick did for the previous release?  I just find it kind of
> >>> difficult to
> >>> be working on various problems and then "ding", the timer goes
> >>> off and we've
> >>> cut off development for a given release.  It's probably time to
> >>> start
> >>> working out a candidate release cycle and content.
> >>>
> >>> Kevin
> >>
> >> Craig Russell
> >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/
> >> jdo
> >> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> >> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> >>
> >
>
> Craig Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message