shale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rahul Akolkar" <rahul.akol...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Shale 1.0.5
Date Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:52:04 GMT
On 6/5/08, Greg Reddin <gredbug@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 2:53 PM, Rahul Akolkar <rahul.akolkar@gmail.com> wrote:
>  > 1) The *test* artifacts aren't meant to be distributed via releases,
>  > or used for anything beyond local testing, IIRC. (the usecases apps
>  > are meant to demo features). I would prefer we leave them out, to
>  > avoid many differences in this point release. You should be able to
>  > just blow those *test* directories / artifacts away in the m2 staging
>  > repo / dist area.
>
>
> Thanks, Rahul. Just to clarify, you're suggesting that we include the
>  usecase apps in the release, but *not* include the *-test artifacts
>  (except the ones that are core, like shale-test itself), correct?
>
<snip/>

Yes, so the list of artifacts in v1.0.4 listed here (except obvious
changes such as shale-tiles):

  http://markmail.org/message/kpy7tlfj6m2xq7e6


>  > ... or some such. The important bit is to note the initial quality as
>  > beta. This is one of the things I did not do when posting the CfV for
>  > v1.0.4 (and we had to clarify that in a separate thread later). This
>  > way the release announcement can state the initial quality to be beta
>  > (and that it will potentially be revised later).
>
>
> I don't have a problem with that. IIRC, other projects (Struts, Tiles)
>  don't specify the quality at all until after the release is posted.
>  They just push a release and later declare it alpha, beta, or GA. I
>  don't mind specifying initially that this will be beta if that makes
>  people more comfortable voting.
>
<snap/>

I have a slight preference for starting with a beta, but its your call
:-) That won't affect my vote (I intend to check the artifacts by
Saturday).

-Rahul

Mime
View raw message