You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> on 2006/12/11 22:05:45 UTC
MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
All,
Being the overly optimistic one that I am I'd like to branch trunk
tomorrow in the afternoon. The goal of the branch is to stabilize a
milestone release with the content previously discussed.
So far it looks like we have:
JSF,
Java Mail
Tomcat 6
Jetty 6
JSTL
Java 1.5 ready
and JPA
I think Kevan is working on the specs which need to be completed for
Geronimo 2.0 as well as 1.2. OpenEJB will need to release as well so
I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues tonight or
tomorrow.
I'm currently working through some issues with DayTrader on 1.2 which
also apply to Geronimo 2.0. My thiking is that people will continue
to work on trunk (2.0) while the M1 release is cleaned and made
ready. I'll do the packaging and people can happily continue to hack
away at trunk.
Any major items missing?
Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
Hopefully it will be one cut, one vote, and Xmas vacation :)
On Dec 11, 2006, at 10:58 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
> Do we really need to vote on all of these, and then release and
> then revote, blah, blah? I mean do we want to spend so much energy
> on a pre-alpha tech preview?
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Dec 11, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>>
>>> You do not need a branch for this. You can easily make a release
>>> like this using `mvn release:*` off of trunk, and it will update
>>> the poms, label and then update to the next version for development.
>>>
>>
>> I was thinking that our normal process is branch...make a tar ball
>> or two to vote on, modify stuff, cut another one, etc. Doing this
>> straight out of trunk would work if everything was perfect but if
>> people didn't like the content we'd have to do it again. how
>> would that affect Maven?
>>
>> Matt Hogstrom
>> matt@hogstrom.org
>>
>>
>
>
Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
Do we really need to vote on all of these, and then release and then
revote, blah, blah? I mean do we want to spend so much energy on a
pre-alpha tech preview?
--jason
On Dec 11, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>> You do not need a branch for this. You can easily make a release
>> like this using `mvn release:*` off of trunk, and it will update
>> the poms, label and then update to the next version for development.
>>
>
> I was thinking that our normal process is branch...make a tar ball
> or two to vote on, modify stuff, cut another one, etc. Doing this
> straight out of trunk would work if everything was perfect but if
> people didn't like the content we'd have to do it again. how would
> that affect Maven?
>
> Matt Hogstrom
> matt@hogstrom.org
>
>
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
> You do not need a branch for this. You can easily make a release
> like this using `mvn release:*` off of trunk, and it will update
> the poms, label and then update to the next version for development.
>
I was thinking that our normal process is branch...make a tar ball or
two to vote on, modify stuff, cut another one, etc. Doing this
straight out of trunk would work if everything was perfect but if
people didn't like the content we'd have to do it again. how would
that affect Maven?
Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
You do not need a branch for this. You can easily make a release
like this using `mvn release:*` off of trunk, and it will update the
poms, label and then update to the next version for development.
--jason
On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:37 PM, Paul McMahan wrote:
> In order to make a release you have to touch several files, such as
> bumping the versions from 2.0-SNAPSHOT to 2.0-M1 in the poms. IIUC
> that is all we need the branch for and can otherwise continue working
> on trunk without porting changes back to the branch.
>
> Best wishes,
> Paul
>
> On 12/11/06, Prasad Kashyap <go...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Another Q.
>>
>> If a branch is made, would the code there have to maintained ? Would
>> bug fixes in 1.2 be rolled into the trunk as well as the M1
>> branch ? I
>> hope not.
>>
>> I hope it is just for tagging purpose and the code there would not
>> have to be maintained post M1 release.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Prasad
>>
>> On 12/11/06, Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com> wrote:
>> > Why? I don't see why we would want to make a branch just for
>> 2.0-m1.
>> >
>> > SVN is not the best tool for working with many branches, so I would
>> > recommend keeping the active branches to an absolute minimum.
>> >
>> > What happened to stabilizing 1.2 and getting that out?
>> >
>> > I think that if you want to make 2.0-m1, then just pick a time on
>> > trunk when it looks good, then make the release and move on to the
>> > next milestone. IMO adding more branches here will just complicate
>> > the matter way more than it needs to be for a pre-alpha release.
>> >
>> > --jason
>> >
>> >
>> > On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>> >
>> > > All,
>> > >
>> > > Being the overly optimistic one that I am I'd like to branch
>> trunk
>> > > tomorrow in the afternoon. The goal of the branch is to
>> stabilize
>> > > a milestone release with the content previously discussed.
>> > >
>> > > So far it looks like we have:
>> > >
>> > > JSF,
>> > > Java Mail
>> > > Tomcat 6
>> > > Jetty 6
>> > > JSTL
>> > > Java 1.5 ready
>> > > and JPA
>> > >
>> > > I think Kevan is working on the specs which need to be completed
>> > > for Geronimo 2.0 as well as 1.2. OpenEJB will need to release as
>> > > well so I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues
>> > > tonight or tomorrow.
>> > >
>> > > I'm currently working through some issues with DayTrader on 1.2
>> > > which also apply to Geronimo 2.0. My thiking is that people will
>> > > continue to work on trunk (2.0) while the M1 release is
>> cleaned and
>> > > made ready. I'll do the packaging and people can happily
>> continue
>> > > to hack away at trunk.
>> > >
>> > > Any major items missing?
>> > >
>> > > Matt Hogstrom
>> > > matt@hogstrom.org
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Posted by Paul McMahan <pa...@gmail.com>.
In order to make a release you have to touch several files, such as
bumping the versions from 2.0-SNAPSHOT to 2.0-M1 in the poms. IIUC
that is all we need the branch for and can otherwise continue working
on trunk without porting changes back to the branch.
Best wishes,
Paul
On 12/11/06, Prasad Kashyap <go...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Another Q.
>
> If a branch is made, would the code there have to maintained ? Would
> bug fixes in 1.2 be rolled into the trunk as well as the M1 branch ? I
> hope not.
>
> I hope it is just for tagging purpose and the code there would not
> have to be maintained post M1 release.
>
> Cheers
> Prasad
>
> On 12/11/06, Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com> wrote:
> > Why? I don't see why we would want to make a branch just for 2.0-m1.
> >
> > SVN is not the best tool for working with many branches, so I would
> > recommend keeping the active branches to an absolute minimum.
> >
> > What happened to stabilizing 1.2 and getting that out?
> >
> > I think that if you want to make 2.0-m1, then just pick a time on
> > trunk when it looks good, then make the release and move on to the
> > next milestone. IMO adding more branches here will just complicate
> > the matter way more than it needs to be for a pre-alpha release.
> >
> > --jason
> >
> >
> > On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > Being the overly optimistic one that I am I'd like to branch trunk
> > > tomorrow in the afternoon. The goal of the branch is to stabilize
> > > a milestone release with the content previously discussed.
> > >
> > > So far it looks like we have:
> > >
> > > JSF,
> > > Java Mail
> > > Tomcat 6
> > > Jetty 6
> > > JSTL
> > > Java 1.5 ready
> > > and JPA
> > >
> > > I think Kevan is working on the specs which need to be completed
> > > for Geronimo 2.0 as well as 1.2. OpenEJB will need to release as
> > > well so I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues
> > > tonight or tomorrow.
> > >
> > > I'm currently working through some issues with DayTrader on 1.2
> > > which also apply to Geronimo 2.0. My thiking is that people will
> > > continue to work on trunk (2.0) while the M1 release is cleaned and
> > > made ready. I'll do the packaging and people can happily continue
> > > to hack away at trunk.
> > >
> > > Any major items missing?
> > >
> > > Matt Hogstrom
> > > matt@hogstrom.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Posted by Prasad Kashyap <go...@gmail.com>.
Another Q.
If a branch is made, would the code there have to maintained ? Would
bug fixes in 1.2 be rolled into the trunk as well as the M1 branch ? I
hope not.
I hope it is just for tagging purpose and the code there would not
have to be maintained post M1 release.
Cheers
Prasad
On 12/11/06, Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com> wrote:
> Why? I don't see why we would want to make a branch just for 2.0-m1.
>
> SVN is not the best tool for working with many branches, so I would
> recommend keeping the active branches to an absolute minimum.
>
> What happened to stabilizing 1.2 and getting that out?
>
> I think that if you want to make 2.0-m1, then just pick a time on
> trunk when it looks good, then make the release and move on to the
> next milestone. IMO adding more branches here will just complicate
> the matter way more than it needs to be for a pre-alpha release.
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > Being the overly optimistic one that I am I'd like to branch trunk
> > tomorrow in the afternoon. The goal of the branch is to stabilize
> > a milestone release with the content previously discussed.
> >
> > So far it looks like we have:
> >
> > JSF,
> > Java Mail
> > Tomcat 6
> > Jetty 6
> > JSTL
> > Java 1.5 ready
> > and JPA
> >
> > I think Kevan is working on the specs which need to be completed
> > for Geronimo 2.0 as well as 1.2. OpenEJB will need to release as
> > well so I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues
> > tonight or tomorrow.
> >
> > I'm currently working through some issues with DayTrader on 1.2
> > which also apply to Geronimo 2.0. My thiking is that people will
> > continue to work on trunk (2.0) while the M1 release is cleaned and
> > made ready. I'll do the packaging and people can happily continue
> > to hack away at trunk.
> >
> > Any major items missing?
> >
> > Matt Hogstrom
> > matt@hogstrom.org
> >
> >
>
>
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
Why? I don't see why we would want to make a branch just for 2.0-m1.
SVN is not the best tool for working with many branches, so I would
recommend keeping the active branches to an absolute minimum.
What happened to stabilizing 1.2 and getting that out?
I think that if you want to make 2.0-m1, then just pick a time on
trunk when it looks good, then make the release and move on to the
next milestone. IMO adding more branches here will just complicate
the matter way more than it needs to be for a pre-alpha release.
--jason
On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> All,
>
> Being the overly optimistic one that I am I'd like to branch trunk
> tomorrow in the afternoon. The goal of the branch is to stabilize
> a milestone release with the content previously discussed.
>
> So far it looks like we have:
>
> JSF,
> Java Mail
> Tomcat 6
> Jetty 6
> JSTL
> Java 1.5 ready
> and JPA
>
> I think Kevan is working on the specs which need to be completed
> for Geronimo 2.0 as well as 1.2. OpenEJB will need to release as
> well so I'm hoping to have an answer on the DayTrader issues
> tonight or tomorrow.
>
> I'm currently working through some issues with DayTrader on 1.2
> which also apply to Geronimo 2.0. My thiking is that people will
> continue to work on trunk (2.0) while the M1 release is cleaned and
> made ready. I'll do the packaging and people can happily continue
> to hack away at trunk.
>
> Any major items missing?
>
> Matt Hogstrom
> matt@hogstrom.org
>
>
Re: MileStone 1 Release of Geronimo 2.0 Branch Notice
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
On Dec 11, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> OpenEJB will need to release as well so I'm hoping to have an
> answer on the DayTrader issues tonight or tomorrow.
FYI, I have a similar thread on openejb-dev about releasing 2.2.
Make sure you read/reply if you have any open 2.2 issues.
-David