New release?

[Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>]

Hi folks,

I would like to propose doing a new release. There have been quite a
few important fixes or changes since 0.9, mainly in proton-j, that I
would like to see made available for use in dependent projects such as
the JMS client. These include things such as preventing a few memory
leaks, some changes to stop erroneous attach frames being sent, and
some updates in the new heartbeat support to align its timing
behaviour with proton-c.

I dont think there is anything on master specific to proton-j that I
wouldnt include currently, however it seems likely the same isn't true
for proton-c right now, e.g with the large SASL changes having just
had their initial landing this week and given that the next release
was probably not expected to be for a noticable period of time. As a
result I would propose doing a point release based on 0.9, branching
from the 0.9 tag (e.g to 0.9.x) and then cherry picking any desired
changes to include.

Thoughts?

Robbie

Re: New release?

[Timothy Bish <ta...@gmail.com>]

On 04/23/2015 06:39 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I would like to propose doing a new release. There have been quite a
> few important fixes or changes since 0.9, mainly in proton-j, that I
> would like to see made available for use in dependent projects such as
> the JMS client. These include things such as preventing a few memory
> leaks, some changes to stop erroneous attach frames being sent, and
> some updates in the new heartbeat support to align its timing
> behaviour with proton-c.
>
> I dont think there is anything on master specific to proton-j that I
> wouldnt include currently, however it seems likely the same isn't true
> for proton-c right now, e.g with the large SASL changes having just
> had their initial landing this week and given that the next release
> was probably not expected to be for a noticable period of time. As a
> result I would propose doing a point release based on 0.9, branching
> from the 0.9 tag (e.g to 0.9.x) and then cherry picking any desired
> changes to include.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Robbie
>
+1  a quick point release would be good given the nature of those
Proton-J fixes.

-- 
Tim Bish
Sr Software Engineer | RedHat Inc.
tim.bish@redhat.com | www.redhat.com 
twitter: @tabish121
blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/

Re: New release?

[Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>]

On 23 April 2015 at 14:28, Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/23/2015 12:24 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
>>
>> There are a couple of proton-c changes that while not as critical as the
>> proton-j stuff would make sense to go out in such a release, e.g. there is
>> a two line fix that avoids zombie connections building up when the network
>> dies in just the right way, so I'm +1 on a quick turnaround release.
>
>
> I'd like to get PROTON-850 in to that, and also ideally PROTON-858 though
> I'm still working on a fix for the latter.
>

Yes, PROTON-850 was definitely on my mental list, since I added a test
for proton-j (which was also affected) that I know would fail against
proton-c without it.

PROTON-858 definitely seems like it warrants inclusion if a fix is available.

> Additionally I'd like to get the python tutorial thats now on master in, as
> that just missed the last release. It's still not integrated in with the
> build, and depending on timing I may be able to get that done in time, but
> its still useful (I hope).
>

Including the tutorial bits definitely sounds useful too, whether
integrated or not.

Ideally in terms of timelines I'd like to put this out quickly, some
time next week.

Re: New release?

[Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com>]

On 04/23/2015 12:24 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
> There are a couple of proton-c changes that while not as critical as the
> proton-j stuff would make sense to go out in such a release, e.g. there is
> a two line fix that avoids zombie connections building up when the network
> dies in just the right way, so I'm +1 on a quick turnaround release.

I'd like to get PROTON-850 in to that, and also ideally PROTON-858 
though I'm still working on a fix for the latter.

Additionally I'd like to get the python tutorial thats now on master in, 
as that just missed the last release. It's still not integrated in with 
the build, and depending on timing I may be able to get that done in 
time, but its still useful (I hope).

Re: New release?

[Rafael Schloming <rh...@alum.mit.edu>]

There are a couple of proton-c changes that while not as critical as the
proton-j stuff would make sense to go out in such a release, e.g. there is
a two line fix that avoids zombie connections building up when the network
dies in just the right way, so I'm +1 on a quick turnaround release.

--Rafael

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:39 AM, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> I would like to propose doing a new release. There have been quite a
> few important fixes or changes since 0.9, mainly in proton-j, that I
> would like to see made available for use in dependent projects such as
> the JMS client. These include things such as preventing a few memory
> leaks, some changes to stop erroneous attach frames being sent, and
> some updates in the new heartbeat support to align its timing
> behaviour with proton-c.
>
> I dont think there is anything on master specific to proton-j that I
> wouldnt include currently, however it seems likely the same isn't true
> for proton-c right now, e.g with the large SASL changes having just
> had their initial landing this week and given that the next release
> was probably not expected to be for a noticable period of time. As a
> result I would propose doing a point release based on 0.9, branching
> from the 0.9 tag (e.g to 0.9.x) and then cherry picking any desired
> changes to include.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Robbie
>