Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-river-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-river-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8F976104E0 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:55:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 14988 invoked by uid 500); 22 Apr 2013 12:55:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-river-dev-archive@river.apache.org Received: (qmail 14846 invoked by uid 500); 22 Apr 2013 12:55:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@river.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@river.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@river.apache.org Received: (qmail 14817 invoked by uid 99); 22 Apr 2013 12:55:23 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:55:23 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0 tests=FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: error (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [216.221.81.30] (HELO fipsb02.cogeco.net) (216.221.81.30) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:55:17 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ap8EALQydVHY3VTZ/2dsb2JhbABPgz3AfYEddIIfAQEFgQkjLleILbwUj0YWgzEDqC+DKCA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,526,1363147200"; d="scan'208";a="89376627" Received: from d221-84-217.commercial.cgocable.net (HELO 192.168.1.20) ([216.221.84.217]) by fipsb02.cogeco.net with ESMTP; 22 Apr 2013 08:54:35 -0400 Subject: Next release (2.2.1)? From: Greg Trasuk To: dev@river.apache.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Message-Id: <1366634930.24984.123.camel@cameron> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6.305 Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:48:50 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi all: I've been testing the 2.2 branch locally in a few environments, and I haven't seen anything that looks like anything but local configuration issues. So I'd like to move forward with the release process (steps will be described below). I have few questions first... Levels fix - Dennis - I thought I saw a while ago that we didn't have the most recent "com.sun.jini.logging.Levels" fix in the 2.2 branch. Could you check on that, and commit the code that we should release with? Testing - I'm thinking that we should setup one or two Jenkins jobs to test out the "2.2" branch. However, that is likely to conflict with the testing that Peter is doing on his "qa_refactor" branch. Does Jenkins have a way of arbitrating access so that the test runs will not be concurrent, thus avoiding any port conflicts? Anyone have any opinions as to whether we actually need Jenkins jobs, or are we comfortable with a few of us testing the branch locally? Process - As soon as we know we have the right Levels fix, and sort out our questions over testing, and (I would imagine) one or two of us have acceptable test results for the particular revision, then I'll tag the release and generate the release packages, which we can vote on. I'd kind of like to complete this process by the end of the month. Cheers, Greg. On Thu, 2013-03-28 at 15:14, Dennis Reedy wrote: > Hi, > > Was wondering how we are doing with getting the next release out the door? I'd like to suggest that we move on this as soon as possible If there are issues that do come up with the release, we can always release again. > > Regards > > Dennis