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Subject Re: [VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.2.0 release [RESCINDED]
Date Mon, 04 Aug 2008 23:04:39 GMT
Hi all,

We've found a couple of other issues with the 1.2.0 candidate and I'm
formally rescinding the vote to get those issues addressed.

I'm sorry for the false alarm and thanks for your diligence in testing this
release candidate.

-mike

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Michael Dick <michael.d.dick@gmail.com>wrote:

> For the time being I've targetted OPENJPA-628 for 1.2.1. If there are
> additional far reaching concerns we can address them in the JIRA issue and
> decide whether it needs to be re-targetted.
>
> -mike
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 3:26 PM, Pinaki Poddar <ppoddar@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> but can you explain your "far reaching" comment?
>>
>> Apologies for sounding like a 'flip-flopper' during this election session:
>>  My initial impression was that the change will impact adding elements to
>> any detached proxy collection. If that were the case then that is a
>> serious
>> enough case to warranty a resolution. But on a second look, the impact
>> seems
>> to be narrower.
>>  Need more investigation before making any further (wrong) statement.
>>
>>  Regards --
>>
>>
>>
>> Kevin Sutter wrote:
>> >
>> > I can agree that this problem (the r610922 regression) should be
>> resolved,
>> > but since it has been there for quite some time, does it have to be
>> > resolved
>> > before we complete the 1.2.0 release?  I've read through the Issue
>> > (OPENJPA-628) and I understand the basic problem, but can you explain
>> your
>> > "far reaching" comment?  I'm trying to figure out whether this is
>> > pervasive
>> > enough to warrant a re-spin.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Kevin
>> >
>> > On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Pinaki Poddar <ppoddar@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> I have earlier voted +1.
>> >> But now I will like to point out that 1.2.0 should be released *after*
>> >>  either a) r610922 reverted
>> >>  or      b) the regression caused by 610922 (which is far reaching via
>> >> dynamically generated proxies) is resolved
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> View this message in context:
>> >>
>> http://n2.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-OpenJPA-1.2.0-release-tp664599p666095.html
>> >> Sent from the OpenJPA Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://n2.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-OpenJPA-1.2.0-release-tp664599p667447.html
>> Sent from the OpenJPA Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>

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