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: [REMINDER] 1.0.0 branch tonight
Date Mon, 20 Aug 2007 23:07:42 GMT
On 8/20/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mprudhom@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> We will create a "1.0.0" branch as per the existing release process
> at http://openjpa.apache.org/releasing-openjpa.html , so that if
> anyone objects to the release for technical reasons (e.g., misplaces
> license file), we can make those repairs in the "1.0.0" branch and
> then re-cut the release without worrying about other changes that may
> have been slipped into the trunk.



Whether or not we have a parent "1.0" branch to the "1.0.0" branch is
> not something I have considered. Does anyone have any thoughts about
> this? If so, we'll need to make it clear to people what work should
> go into the "1.0" branch and what work should go into the trunk.
> Since we don't have much of a long-term roadmap yet, it might make
> sense to wait until we know which major features will go into OpenJPA
> 1.1, 2.0, 3.0, etc. However, I don't have strong objections to making
> a "1.0" branch.
>
> Thoughts?


I'd prefer to wait until we have a roadmap in place. If we create a parent
branch then we'll end up doing a lot of dual maintenance with trunk and 1.0.
If/when we need to add new function which breaks backwards compatibility
then we can create a branch for 1.x and go forward with 2.0.0 in trunk.

The plan can change when we have a roadmap in place or have targetted JIRA
issues for 1.1 vs 2.0.0.

While creating the 1.0 parent branch is probably cleaner schematically I
don't see a practical benefit unless there are changes coming that warrant a
major release. Until we get to that point I'm content to play it by ear a
bit. That's just MHO though.

-Mike

On Aug 20, 2007, at 6:20 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>
> > Well, I definitely don't think that work should happen in a branch
> > called 1.0.0. Rather, it would seem that we would want to create a
> > branch called 1.0, and tag from it.
> >
> > I think that we should make a 1.0 branch tonight, and then all future
> > work in the 1.0 line will happen in it. So, if something goes wrong
> > while building / voting on the release, we'll resolve those issues in
> > the 1.0 branch, not in trunk. That way, people can keep on working on
> > trunk, which will immediately become the 1.1 train.
> >
> > -Patrick
> >
> > On 8/20/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mprudhom@apache.org> wrote:
> >> Patrick-
> >>
> >> I expect that we'll keep the "1.0.0" branch around, and then make a
> >> "1.0.0" tag once the release is cut and approved.
> >>
> >> What happens with the "1.0.0" branch (i.e., if 1.0.1 work takes place
> >> in the 1.0.0 branch or in trunk) is, I believe, a topic that has yet
> >> to be discussed.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Aug 20, 2007, at 1:42 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I think that we should be making a permanent 1.0 branch, and then
> >>> tag
> >>> off of it, so that we have somewhere to work on 1.0.1. Or do things
> >>> work differently in svn?
> >>>
> >>> -Patrick
> >>>
> >>> On 8/20/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mprudhom@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>> OpenJPA Developers-
> >>>>
> >>>> Pursuant to the vote at http://www.nabble.com/-DISCUSS--set-a-
> >>>> deadline-for-1.0.0-features-t4233167.html , a branch for OpenJPA
> >>>> 1.0.0 will be created tonight at 11:59 PM EST, and a release
> >>>> candidate will be immediately created for voting on the final 1.0.0
> >>>> release.
> >>>>
> >>>> If anyone needs more time for essential bugfixes, now is the
> >>>> time to
> >>>> speak up.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Marc Prud'hommeaux
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Patrick Linskey
> >>> 202 669 5907
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Linskey
> > 202 669 5907
>
>

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