openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Albert Lee <allee8...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0?
Date Mon, 09 Jan 2012 23:21:13 GMT
Mark,

You can branch from trunk to branches/2.2.x and eventually to tags/2.2.0.

Per Donald and Kevin's suggestions, we can work on branches/2.2.x to:
- Clean up experimental code
- Remove Jest module, if needed. I believe we only need to remove module
and dependency definitions in 2 pom.xml and leave the openjpa-jest module
intact for future work.
- Other works.

Thanks,
Albert Lee.

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:

> that's perfectly fine. Thus I will start creating the branch in +4h if no
> one objects?
>
> What should the branch name be?
>
>
> "2.2.x" is d'accord with your naming conventions?
>
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Albert Lee <allee8285@gmail.com>
> > To: dev@openjpa.apache.org; Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 6:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0?
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > Will it be fair to assume the following:
> > - Since your interest is to get 2.2.0 release out asap, you will be start
> > doing the 2.2.0 release work sometime this week.
> > - Once the release is complete we will assume the ownership of this
> > release, for service maintenance.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Albert Lee.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
> >
> >>  Hi Albert!
> >>  I have no special interrest in maintaining this branch longer as
> needed.
> >>  I'm just a user like anyone else.
> >>
> >>  The main reason for pushing this release is that the last OpenJPA
> release
> >>  was pretty long time ago and trunk already contains quite a few
> important
> >>  improvements.
> >>
> >>  In OpenWebBeans and MyFaces we usually only create a new maintenance
> >>  branch if there were big new features to be incorporated in trunk. If
> we
> >>  know that we like to do a new heavyweight feature, then we create a
> branch
> >>  for 2.2.x and do the maintenance there. Otherwise we release from trunk
> >>  because we don't like to do all the merging stuff if not really needed.
> >>
> >>  But I'm fine with whatever branching behaviour the OpenJPA community is
> >>  used to (just need to know it).
> >>
> >>
> >>  LieGrue,
> >>  strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  > From: Albert Lee <allee8285@gmail.com>
> >>  > To: dev@openjpa.apache.org
> >>  > Cc:
> >>  > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2012 6:41 PM
> >>  > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0?
> >>  >
> >>  > Mark,
> >>  >
> >>  > You are advocating a 2.2.x maintenance release. Per Kevin's note
> > on
> >>  service
> >>  > branch management, do you have a need to "own" that release
> > for your
> >>  > product servicing need?
> >>  >
> >>  > We have the same service requirement based on trunk right now. If you
> >>  need
> >>  > owning the 2.2.1 service branch, we can create a separate 2.2.2 after
> >>  2.2.1
> >>  > is completed. Otherwise we can be the release owner of the 2.2.1
> > branch.
> >>  >
> >>  > Albert Lee.
> >>  >
> >>  > On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Kevin Sutter
> > <kwsutter@gmail.com>
> >>  wrote:
> >>  >
> >>  >>  Hi Mark,
> >>  >>  You're on the right track.  You can browse the OpenJPA svn
> > repository
> >>  > to
> >>  >>  see how we've done it in the past.  For example, each of our
> > major
> >>  > releases
> >>  >>  is always tagged:
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/tags
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  And, corresponding to most of these releases is a service branch:
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  Mainline development continues on trunk.  So, once we cut the
> > 2.2.0
> >>  >>  release, then trunk becomes 2.3.0-SNAPSHOT.  That is, trunk is
> > working
> >>  >>  towards the next 2.3.0 release.
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  Each of the service branches has an owning manager.  That manager
> >>  normally
> >>  >>  creates and maintains that service branch.  Nothing goes into
> > that
> >>  service
> >>  >>  branch without the owning manager's signoff.
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  This approach allows multiple organizations to own their service
> >>  branches,
> >>  >>  if desired.  So, after the 2.2.0 release is complete, we normally
> >>  create
> >>  >>  the 2.2.x service branch.  But, if there is a reason for you to
> >>  maintain a
> >>  >>  2.2.0-mt service branch, there is nothing stopping you.  It's
> > quite
> >>  >>  flexible.
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  At some point, there may be a determination to also create a
> > service
> >>  >>  release off the branch.  For example, you'll notice that we
> > have
> >>  > created a
> >>  >>  2.1.1 release based off the 2.1.x service branch.
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  Make sense?  This is the approach we have used for several
> > releases and
> >>  >>  it's been working for the OpenJPA development team.
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  Here are a few links that help describe our process:
> >>  >>  http://openjpa.apache.org/release-management.html
> >>  >>  http://openjpa.apache.org/openjpa-release-policy.html
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  Kevin
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Mark Struberg
> > <struberg@yahoo.de>
> >>  > wrote:
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  > To not let this slip.
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > What are the release plans in general? Do you like to start
> > with the
> >>  > work
> >>  >>  > on the new JPA spec soon (guess this might take another year
> > to get
> >>  >>  > finished). I'd rather keep the trunk as main development
> > stage and
> >>  > would
> >>  >>  > like to work towards a 2.2.1 afterwards on trunk.
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > The reason why I ask this is for the branch we like to
> > create.
> >>  > It's a
> >>  >>  > difference if we just create a '2.2.0-mt' branch (mt
> > for
> >>  > maintenance)
> >>  >>  only
> >>  >>  > for getting 2.2.0 out of the door, and continue our main
> > development
> >>  >>  effort
> >>  >>  > on trunk. Or if we create a '2.2.x' branch and do
> > the most
> >>  > work there
> >>  >>  (and
> >>  >>  > need to merge all work over to trunk).
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > I'm +1 for 2.2.0-mt
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > If noone objects then I like to start this new branch middle
> > of next
> >>  >>  week.
> >>  >>  > What work needs to be done until then? My gut feeling says:
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > * review open JIRAs
> >>  >>  >   * verify and resolve the ones already fixed
> >>  >>  >   * update the fix-version to 2.2.1 for the others
> >>  >>  > * run the TCK
> >>  >>  > * verify/update the documentation of new features.
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > This reminds me that our pdf doesn't contain good
> > information for
> >>  > the new
> >>  >>  > openjpa-maven-plugin. I was also not able to find where we
> > deploy the
> >>  >>  > plugin documentation to. This is imo something we should
> > review/fix
> >>  >>  before
> >>  >>  > we branch.
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > feel free to add missing tasks.
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > LieGrue,
> >>  >>  > strub
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > ----- Original Message -----
> >>  >>  > > From: Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
> >>  >>  > > To: "dev@openjpa.apache.org"
> >>  > <dev@openjpa.apache.org>
> >>  >>  > > Cc:
> >>  >>  > > Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 8:11 PM
> >>  >>  > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0?
> >>  >>  > >
> >>  >>  > > I'd just branch the trunk and remove JEST later. Or
> > just keep
> >>  > it and
> >>  >>  > mark it
> >>  >>  > > as 'experimental' - doesn't hurt!
> >>  >>  > >
> >>  >>  > > LieGrue,
> >>  >>  > > strub
> >>  >>  > >
> >>  >>  > >
> >>  >>  > >
> >>  >>  > > ----- Original Message -----
> >>  >>  > >>  From: Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@gmail.com>
> >>  >>  > >>  To: dev@openjpa.apache.org; Donald Woods
> >>  > <dwoods@apache.org>
> >>  >>  > >>  Cc:
> >>  >>  > >>  Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 7:41 PM
> >>  >>  > >>  Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0?
> >>  >>  > >>
> >>  >>  > >>  Donald,
> >>  >>  > >>
> >>  >>  > >>>   I would suggest someone verifying a clean TCK
> > run
> >>  > before we branch.
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>
> >>  >>  > >>  Excellent idea.  We used to have someone from the
> > Apache
> >>  > community do
> >>  >>  > this
> >>  >>  > >>  for us since not everybody has access to the TCK.
> > Is there
> >>  > someone
> >>  >>  > that
> >>  >>  > >>  can step up to do this?
> >>  >>  > >>
> >>  >>  > >>
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>>   Also, are there any samples or experimental
> > code that
> >>  > needs to be
> >>  >>  > > removed
> >>  >>  > >>>   or cleaned up before we create a 2.2.0
> > release?
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>
> >>  >>  > >>  Since you brought this up...  I'm think we
> > need to
> >>  > re-think the JEST
> >>  >>  > > module
> >>  >>  > >>  that is currently in trunk.  Pinaki originally put
> > it into
> >>  > trunk with
> >>  >>  > the
> >>  >>  > >>  hopes of solidifying it before we do another
> > release.  I
> >>  > don't think
> >>  >>  > > that
> >>  >>  > >>  effort has transpired.  Since it's a separate
> > module,
> >>  > maybe it can be
> >>  >>  > >>  pulled before creating the 2.2.0 release and 2.2.x
> > service
> >>  > stream and
> >>  >>  > then
> >>  >>  > >>  put back into trunk?  Other ideas?
> >>  >>  > >>
> >>  >>  > >>  Kevin
> >>  >>  > >>
> >>  >>  > >>
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>>   -Donald
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>>   ________________________________
> >>  >>  > >>>    From: Mark Struberg
> > <struberg@yahoo.de>
> >>  >>  > >>>   To: openjpa-dev
> > <dev@openjpa.apache.org>
> >>  >>  > >>>   Cc: David Blevins
> > <david.blevins@gmail.com>
> >>  >>  > >>>   Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 12:11 PM
> >>  >>  > >>>   Subject: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0?
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>>   Hi folks!
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>>   I've now used openjpa-2.2.0 excessively
> > and it
> >>  > looks very good to
> >>  >>  > > me.
> >>  >>  > >>>   What do you think about going forward and
> > shipping a
> >>  > 2.2.0?
> >>  >>  > >>>   Or at least a RC1...
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>>   OpenEJB and Geronimo are waiting for an
> > openjpa-2.2.x
> >>  > release as
> >>  >>  well
> >>  >>  > > ;)
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>>   LieGrue,
> >>  >>  > >>>   strub
> >>  >>  > >>>
> >>  >>  > >>
> >>  >>  > >
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  > --
> >>  > Albert Lee.
> >>  >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Albert Lee.
> >
>



-- 
Albert Lee.

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