Re: Ivy 2.0 RC1 planning

[Xavier Hanin <xa...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

It seems we're getting very close to be able to release 2.0-RC1. The current
issues targeted for 2.0-RC1 consist only of the performance issue that we
agreed to postpone, and an issue on which we wait for some additional input,
if none comes we can resolve it. Therefore current trunk should be very
close to what 2.0-RC1 will be.

So I suggest all Ivy developers and users following the trunk to build from
trunk now, and test this trunk version before we release 2.0-RC1. It's
always quicker to fix things before the release is done.

Then if we agree we could prepare the release for the vote before the end of
the week. I volunteer to be release manager for this version, unless someone
steps up.

Xavier

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Xavier Hanin <xa...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've been working on the remaining issues targetted to 2.0-RC1, and only a
> few are remaining.
>
> We have:
> IVY-835  <ivy:install> ant task downloads wrong jars from maven
> repositories
> IVY-675  Wrong graph of nodes is logged when circular dependency is
> detected
> IVY-349  Endless recursion in Report
>   => those are about to be closed as cannot reproduce if no new activity
> happens soon
>
> IVY-652  Ivy constructs incorrect URL if artifact path contains spaces
>   => This one Maarten you seem to have already made good progress, any
> insight on the remaining time?
>
> IVY-387  Absolute and relative path
> IVY-232  Incorrect directory path resolve when running from a different
> directory
>   => These two are rather old, assigned to you Gilles. Any progress on
> these? Do you need help?
>
> IVY-872  Improve performance
>   => This one is new and assigned to you Gilles. I don't think this should
> be a show stopper for 2.0, and can be postponed to 2.0.1 if it takes too
> long to implement
>
> So I think we're pretty close to be able to enter in 2.0 release candidates
> cycles, to finally get 2.0 out! Do you see any other outstanding issue which
> should get in 2.0? Would you agree with a plan trying to get 2.0 RC1 out
> before mid september? Then how do you see the release candidates cycles
> going on? I'd be in favour of trying to keep the cycles short (sg like every
> 2 weeks), and if no outstanding bug is reported in a cycle, then we release
> 2.0 final with the same source code as the last RC. What do you think of
> this plan?
>
> Xavier
> --
> Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant
> http://xhab.blogspot.com/
> http://ant.apache.org/ivy/
> http://www.xoocode.org/
>



-- 
Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant
http://xhab.blogspot.com/
http://ant.apache.org/ivy/
http://www.xoocode.org/