You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openjpa.apache.org by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID> on 2016/09/09 07:24:26 UTC
What versions do we actively work on?
The following versions are currently marked as 'open' in JIRA:
1.0.5
1.1.1
1.2.4
1.3.0
2.0.2
2.0.3
2.1.2
2.2.1.1
2.2.3
2.3.1
2.2.x
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.4.x2.5.0
3.0.0
3
That's pretty confusing for our users. And also nasty when creating a bug.
So my proposal is to first collect the information about which versions we like to maintain at all?
I personally have interest in
* 3.0.0
* 2.4.2
* the 2.* version IBM folks are maintaining (should be exactly 1 I guess)
Please add to the list which version you do think we need as well.
What do we do with the .x versions?
Remove them and move the fix-for to the next maintained version?
E.g. move 2.2.x tickets to 2.2.3
Any ideas?
Re: What versions do we actively work on?
Posted by Heath Thomann <jp...@gmail.com>.
Right, I don't foresee that we'd do a new release anytime soon, if ever.
But what do you mean by "ditch the following version"? Here are the
branches I see:
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openjpa/branches/
2.2.x is a branch, not a version as you listed above??? Basically, I'd
want to keep branches 1.0.x (version 1.0.5), 1.2.x (version 1.2.4), 2.0.x
(version 2.0.2), 2.1.x (version 2.1.2), 2.2.1.x (version 2.2.1.1), and
2.2.x (version 2.2.3). Beyond that, deleting any other branches/versions
is fine by me.
If it would be easier to chat about this on the phone I'd be glad to call
you (I could wrestle Jody into the call as well).
Thanks,
Heath
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>
wrote:
> Hi Heath!
>
> I know that those versions are still used in production
>
> But are those versions still all get a 'fixed-in' flag? ^^
>
>
> I mean do you think that we at ASF will ever do a release for those
> versions again?
> We will of course keep the branches, but will we really do a release?
>
> Probably for 2.2.3, but the rest?
>
>
> In any case we could then at least ditch the following versions
>
>
> 1.0.5
> 1.1.1
> 1.3.0
> 2.0.3
> 2.3.1
> 2.2.x
> 2.4.3
> 2.4.x
> 2.5.0
> 3
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
> > On Tuesday, 13 September 2016, 17:56, Heath Thomann <jp...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > HI! This question seems to be related, or at least in the same vein,
> as
> > OPENJPA-2628, right? Personally (eeeeerrr, professionally) the branches
> I
> > care most about are 1.2.4, 2.0.2, 2.1.2, 2.2.1.1, 2.2.3. I agree that
> all
> > those older version number are starting to make things very bloated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Heath
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:23 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò
> > <il...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 09/09/2016 10:03, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> >>
> >>> 2016-09-09 10:02 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg
> > <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
> >>>
> >>> I know that IBM is still using the 2.2.something branch.
> >>>>
> >>>> I would keep that version around as well, otherwise I agree with
> > you.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm happy with that if we get releases out, if not then
> > that's in
> >>> internal
> >>> IBM fork and that's it no?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >> I tend to agree with Romain: let's stick with 2.4.2 and 3.0.0
> >>
> >> Regards.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Friday, 9 September 2016, 10:00, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I think we should only be concentrated on last stable (2.4.x) and
> > next
> >>>>> one
> >>>>> (3.x). Not seen any release of previous versions for a long
> > time so not
> >>>>> sure there is any interest to keep the branches active there.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> >>>>> <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Wordpress
> > Blog
> >>>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > <https://github.com/
> >>>>>
> >>>> rmannibucau> |
> >>>>
> >>>>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
> > Tomitriber
> >>>>> <http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory
> >>>>> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2016-09-09 9:24 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg
> > <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The following versions are currently marked as 'open'
> > in JIRA:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1.0.5
> >>>>>> 1.1.1
> >>>>>> 1.2.4
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1.3.0
> >>>>>> 2.0.2
> >>>>>> 2.0.3
> >>>>>> 2.1.2
> >>>>>> 2.2.1.1
> >>>>>> 2.2.3
> >>>>>> 2.3.1
> >>>>>> 2.2.x
> >>>>>> 2.4.2
> >>>>>> 2.4.3
> >>>>>> 2.4.x2.5.0
> >>>>>> 3.0.0
> >>>>>> 3
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That's pretty confusing for our users. And also nasty
> > when creating a
> >>>>>> bug.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So my proposal is to first collect the information about
> > which
> >>>>>> versions we like to maintain at all?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I personally have interest in
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * 3.0.0
> >>>>>> * 2.4.2
> >>>>>> * the 2.* version IBM folks are maintaining (should be
> > exactly 1 I
> >>>>>> guess)
> >>>>>> Please add to the list which version you do think we need
> > as well.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What do we do with the .x versions?
> >>>>>> Remove them and move the fix-for to the next maintained
> > version?
> >>>>>> E.g. move 2.2.x tickets to 2.2.3
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Any ideas?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >> --
> >> Francesco Chicchiriccò
> >>
> >> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
> >> http://www.tirasa.net/
> >>
> >> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
> >> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC,
> >> CXF Committer, OpenJPA Committer, PonyMail PPMC
> >> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Re: What versions do we actively work on?
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>.
Hi Heath!
I know that those versions are still used in production
But are those versions still all get a 'fixed-in' flag? ^^
I mean do you think that we at ASF will ever do a release for those versions again?
We will of course keep the branches, but will we really do a release?
Probably for 2.2.3, but the rest?
In any case we could then at least ditch the following versions
1.0.5
1.1.1
1.3.0
2.0.3
2.3.1
2.2.x
2.4.3
2.4.x
2.5.0
3
LieGrue,
strub
> On Tuesday, 13 September 2016, 17:56, Heath Thomann <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > HI! This question seems to be related, or at least in the same vein, as
> OPENJPA-2628, right? Personally (eeeeerrr, professionally) the branches I
> care most about are 1.2.4, 2.0.2, 2.1.2, 2.2.1.1, 2.2.3. I agree that all
> those older version number are starting to make things very bloated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Heath
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:23 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò
> <il...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On 09/09/2016 10:03, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>
>>> 2016-09-09 10:02 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg
> <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
>>>
>>> I know that IBM is still using the 2.2.something branch.
>>>>
>>>> I would keep that version around as well, otherwise I agree with
> you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm happy with that if we get releases out, if not then
> that's in
>>> internal
>>> IBM fork and that's it no?
>>>
>>
>> Hi,
>> I tend to agree with Romain: let's stick with 2.4.2 and 3.0.0
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>>
>> On Friday, 9 September 2016, 10:00, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think we should only be concentrated on last stable (2.4.x) and
> next
>>>>> one
>>>>> (3.x). Not seen any release of previous versions for a long
> time so not
>>>>> sure there is any interest to keep the branches active there.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
>>>>> <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Wordpress
> Blog
>>>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/
>>>>>
>>>> rmannibucau> |
>>>>
>>>>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
> Tomitriber
>>>>> <http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory
>>>>> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2016-09-09 9:24 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg
> <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
>>>>>
>>>>> The following versions are currently marked as 'open'
> in JIRA:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.0.5
>>>>>> 1.1.1
>>>>>> 1.2.4
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.3.0
>>>>>> 2.0.2
>>>>>> 2.0.3
>>>>>> 2.1.2
>>>>>> 2.2.1.1
>>>>>> 2.2.3
>>>>>> 2.3.1
>>>>>> 2.2.x
>>>>>> 2.4.2
>>>>>> 2.4.3
>>>>>> 2.4.x2.5.0
>>>>>> 3.0.0
>>>>>> 3
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's pretty confusing for our users. And also nasty
> when creating a
>>>>>> bug.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So my proposal is to first collect the information about
> which
>>>>>> versions we like to maintain at all?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I personally have interest in
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * 3.0.0
>>>>>> * 2.4.2
>>>>>> * the 2.* version IBM folks are maintaining (should be
> exactly 1 I
>>>>>> guess)
>>>>>> Please add to the list which version you do think we need
> as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do we do with the .x versions?
>>>>>> Remove them and move the fix-for to the next maintained
> version?
>>>>>> E.g. move 2.2.x tickets to 2.2.3
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>> --
>> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>>
>> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
>> http://www.tirasa.net/
>>
>> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
>> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC,
>> CXF Committer, OpenJPA Committer, PonyMail PPMC
>> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
>>
>>
>
Re: What versions do we actively work on?
Posted by Heath Thomann <jp...@gmail.com>.
HI! This question seems to be related, or at least in the same vein, as
OPENJPA-2628, right? Personally (eeeeerrr, professionally) the branches I
care most about are 1.2.4, 2.0.2, 2.1.2, 2.2.1.1, 2.2.3. I agree that all
those older version number are starting to make things very bloated.
Thanks,
Heath
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:23 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>
wrote:
> On 09/09/2016 10:03, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
>> 2016-09-09 10:02 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
>>
>> I know that IBM is still using the 2.2.something branch.
>>>
>>> I would keep that version around as well, otherwise I agree with you.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm happy with that if we get releases out, if not then that's in
>> internal
>> IBM fork and that's it no?
>>
>
> Hi,
> I tend to agree with Romain: let's stick with 2.4.2 and 3.0.0
>
> Regards.
>
>
> On Friday, 9 September 2016, 10:00, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think we should only be concentrated on last stable (2.4.x) and next
>>>> one
>>>> (3.x). Not seen any release of previous versions for a long time so not
>>>> sure there is any interest to keep the branches active there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
>>>> <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Wordpress Blog
>>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/
>>>>
>>> rmannibucau> |
>>>
>>>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
>>>> <http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory
>>>> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2016-09-09 9:24 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
>>>>
>>>> The following versions are currently marked as 'open' in JIRA:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.0.5
>>>>> 1.1.1
>>>>> 1.2.4
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.3.0
>>>>> 2.0.2
>>>>> 2.0.3
>>>>> 2.1.2
>>>>> 2.2.1.1
>>>>> 2.2.3
>>>>> 2.3.1
>>>>> 2.2.x
>>>>> 2.4.2
>>>>> 2.4.3
>>>>> 2.4.x2.5.0
>>>>> 3.0.0
>>>>> 3
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's pretty confusing for our users. And also nasty when creating a
>>>>> bug.
>>>>>
>>>>> So my proposal is to first collect the information about which
>>>>> versions we like to maintain at all?
>>>>>
>>>>> I personally have interest in
>>>>>
>>>>> * 3.0.0
>>>>> * 2.4.2
>>>>> * the 2.* version IBM folks are maintaining (should be exactly 1 I
>>>>> guess)
>>>>> Please add to the list which version you do think we need as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do we do with the .x versions?
>>>>> Remove them and move the fix-for to the next maintained version?
>>>>> E.g. move 2.2.x tickets to 2.2.3
>>>>>
>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>
>>>>
> --
> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>
> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
> http://www.tirasa.net/
>
> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC,
> CXF Committer, OpenJPA Committer, PonyMail PPMC
> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
>
>
Re: What versions do we actively work on?
Posted by Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>.
On 09/09/2016 10:03, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> 2016-09-09 10:02 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
>
>> I know that IBM is still using the 2.2.something branch.
>>
>> I would keep that version around as well, otherwise I agree with you.
>>
>>
> I'm happy with that if we get releases out, if not then that's in internal
> IBM fork and that's it no?
Hi,
I tend to agree with Romain: let's stick with 2.4.2 and 3.0.0
Regards.
> On Friday, 9 September 2016, 10:00, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I think we should only be concentrated on last stable (2.4.x) and next one
>>> (3.x). Not seen any release of previous versions for a long time so not
>>> sure there is any interest to keep the branches active there.
>>>
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
>>> <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Wordpress Blog
>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/
>> rmannibucau> |
>>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
>>> <http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory
>>> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2016-09-09 9:24 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
>>>
>>>> The following versions are currently marked as 'open' in JIRA:
>>>>
>>>> 1.0.5
>>>> 1.1.1
>>>> 1.2.4
>>>>
>>>> 1.3.0
>>>> 2.0.2
>>>> 2.0.3
>>>> 2.1.2
>>>> 2.2.1.1
>>>> 2.2.3
>>>> 2.3.1
>>>> 2.2.x
>>>> 2.4.2
>>>> 2.4.3
>>>> 2.4.x2.5.0
>>>> 3.0.0
>>>> 3
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's pretty confusing for our users. And also nasty when creating a bug.
>>>>
>>>> So my proposal is to first collect the information about which versions we like to maintain at all?
>>>>
>>>> I personally have interest in
>>>>
>>>> * 3.0.0
>>>> * 2.4.2
>>>> * the 2.* version IBM folks are maintaining (should be exactly 1 I guess)
>>>> Please add to the list which version you do think we need as well.
>>>>
>>>> What do we do with the .x versions?
>>>> Remove them and move the fix-for to the next maintained version?
>>>> E.g. move 2.2.x tickets to 2.2.3
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas?
--
Francesco Chicchiricc�
Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
http://www.tirasa.net/
Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC,
CXF Committer, OpenJPA Committer, PonyMail PPMC
http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
Re: What versions do we actively work on?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
2016-09-09 10:02 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
> I know that IBM is still using the 2.2.something branch.
>
> I would keep that version around as well, otherwise I agree with you.
>
>
I'm happy with that if we get releases out, if not then that's in internal
IBM fork and that's it no?
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
> On Friday, 9 September 2016, 10:00, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I think we should only be concentrated on last stable (2.4.x) and next one
> >(3.x). Not seen any release of previous versions for a long time so not
> >sure there is any interest to keep the branches active there.
> >
> >
> >Romain Manni-Bucau
> >@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> ><https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Wordpress Blog
> ><http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/
> rmannibucau> |
> >LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> ><http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory
> ><https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
> >
> >
> >2016-09-09 9:24 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
> >
> >> The following versions are currently marked as 'open' in JIRA:
> >>
> >> 1.0.5
> >> 1.1.1
> >> 1.2.4
> >>
> >> 1.3.0
> >> 2.0.2
> >> 2.0.3
> >> 2.1.2
> >> 2.2.1.1
> >> 2.2.3
> >> 2.3.1
> >> 2.2.x
> >> 2.4.2
> >> 2.4.3
> >> 2.4.x2.5.0
> >> 3.0.0
> >> 3
> >>
> >>
> >> That's pretty confusing for our users. And also nasty when creating a
> bug.
> >>
> >>
> >> So my proposal is to first collect the information about which versions
> we
> >> like to maintain at all?
> >>
> >> I personally have interest in
> >>
> >> * 3.0.0
> >> * 2.4.2
> >> * the 2.* version IBM folks are maintaining (should be exactly 1 I
> guess)
> >>
> >> Please add to the list which version you do think we need as well.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> What do we do with the .x versions?
> >> Remove them and move the fix-for to the next maintained version?
> >> E.g. move 2.2.x tickets to 2.2.3
> >>
> >>
> >> Any ideas?
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: What versions do we actively work on?
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>.
I know that IBM is still using the 2.2.something branch.
I would keep that version around as well, otherwise I agree with you.
LieGrue,
strub
On Friday, 9 September 2016, 10:00, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I think we should only be concentrated on last stable (2.4.x) and next one
>(3.x). Not seen any release of previous versions for a long time so not
>sure there is any interest to keep the branches active there.
>
>
>Romain Manni-Bucau
>@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
><https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Wordpress Blog
><http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
><http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory
><https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
>
>
>2016-09-09 9:24 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
>
>> The following versions are currently marked as 'open' in JIRA:
>>
>> 1.0.5
>> 1.1.1
>> 1.2.4
>>
>> 1.3.0
>> 2.0.2
>> 2.0.3
>> 2.1.2
>> 2.2.1.1
>> 2.2.3
>> 2.3.1
>> 2.2.x
>> 2.4.2
>> 2.4.3
>> 2.4.x2.5.0
>> 3.0.0
>> 3
>>
>>
>> That's pretty confusing for our users. And also nasty when creating a bug.
>>
>>
>> So my proposal is to first collect the information about which versions we
>> like to maintain at all?
>>
>> I personally have interest in
>>
>> * 3.0.0
>> * 2.4.2
>> * the 2.* version IBM folks are maintaining (should be exactly 1 I guess)
>>
>> Please add to the list which version you do think we need as well.
>>
>>
>>
>> What do we do with the .x versions?
>> Remove them and move the fix-for to the next maintained version?
>> E.g. move 2.2.x tickets to 2.2.3
>>
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>
>
>
Re: What versions do we actively work on?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
I think we should only be concentrated on last stable (2.4.x) and next one
(3.x). Not seen any release of previous versions for a long time so not
sure there is any interest to keep the branches active there.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Wordpress Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
<http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory
<https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
2016-09-09 9:24 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
> The following versions are currently marked as 'open' in JIRA:
>
> 1.0.5
> 1.1.1
> 1.2.4
>
> 1.3.0
> 2.0.2
> 2.0.3
> 2.1.2
> 2.2.1.1
> 2.2.3
> 2.3.1
> 2.2.x
> 2.4.2
> 2.4.3
> 2.4.x2.5.0
> 3.0.0
> 3
>
>
> That's pretty confusing for our users. And also nasty when creating a bug.
>
>
> So my proposal is to first collect the information about which versions we
> like to maintain at all?
>
> I personally have interest in
>
> * 3.0.0
> * 2.4.2
> * the 2.* version IBM folks are maintaining (should be exactly 1 I guess)
>
> Please add to the list which version you do think we need as well.
>
>
>
> What do we do with the .x versions?
> Remove them and move the fix-for to the next maintained version?
> E.g. move 2.2.x tickets to 2.2.3
>
>
> Any ideas?
>