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 2006/04/17 13:30:02 UTC
1.1 Release (Version Upgrades)
We're nearing the end of the CTS cycle and will soon have a stable 1.1. Once we reach this critical
stage we need to move into the final stages to release 1.1. Here is my proposed list.
*Starting now:*
1. Code freeze for 2006/04/18 23:59 PST (except bug and performance fixes)
*Once we've reached CTS stable:* (feel free to volunteer for tasks)
1. Begin changing packages to upgrade as appropriate (proposed list below)
2. Develop *Release Notes*
3. Draft a *Press Release*
4. Begin performance regression
5. SWAG a date Release Candidate
6. Test, Test, Test
*After 1.1 is stable:*
1. Formalize strategy for syncing 1.1 and HEAD
2. Define a set of release goals for 1.2 and propose a target date
I suggest that we define a theme for a release to help the group focus on a set of goals
that will guide the work for the next release. This is not intended to be a rigid
constraint but merely to provide some direction. It will also help us define a target
release date to help us deliver on a consistent schedule for our users.
3. Solicit user feedback for prioritizing work
Listening to our users and providing them with the features they want.
4. Aggressively update our dependent package versions to new new levels.
Cheers,
Matt
*Version Upgrades - Matt's Suggestions*
I looked at the packages out there and here is the first stab at which ones we should upgrade.
Comments?
*G* *Available*
*Version* *Package* *Version* *Version*
1.1 activemq 3.2.1 3.2.3
1.1 castor 0.9.5.3 0.9.9.1 or 1.0M3
1.1 daytrader 1.1-SNAPSHOT 1.1-SNAPSHOT
1.1 derby 10.0.2.1 10.1.2.1
1.1 derby 10.1.1.0 10.1.2.1
1.1 jasper 5.5.9 5.5.15
1.1 jasper 5.5.12 5.5.15
1.1 jetty 5.1.9 5.1.10
1.1 openejb 2.1-SNAPSHOT 2.1-SNAPSHOT
1.1 stax 1.1.1-dev 1.1.2
1.1 tomcat 5.5.9 5.5.15
1.1 tomcat_ajp 5.5.9 5.5.15
1.1 tranql 1.2.1 1.3-SNAPSHOT
1.1 tranql_connector 1.1 1.2-SNAPSHOT
Re: 1.1 Release (Version Upgrades)
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
Thanks Hiram. I'll ask Kevan and Jencks for their input on this.
Hiram Chirino wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We will release ActiveMQ 3.2.4 as soon as the G folks say that the
> current 3.2.4-SNAPSHOT looks good to them.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hiram
>
>
>
Re: 1.1 Release (Version Upgrades)
Posted by Hiram Chirino <hi...@hiramchirino.com>.
Hi,
We will release ActiveMQ 3.2.4 as soon as the G folks say that the
current 3.2.4-SNAPSHOT looks good to them.
--
Regards,
Hiram
Re: 1.1 Release (Version Upgrades)
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
I'll include the commons-fileupload update you mentioned in the list. As far as the console fixes I
consider them bugs. The freeze date is to prevent the addition of cool new things that didn't exist
before. Bug JIRAs and fixes to the build are the next phase to focus on. I'll be monitoring the
commits to the 1.1 branch and plan to -1 things that are not related to finalizing the release
(fixing bugs, fixing CTS, performance / runtime defects, etc.).
Matt
Aaron Mulder wrote:
> We need to update commons-fileupload for 1.1 if it doesn't terribly --
> the current one hangs occasionally (when the console processes upload
> files) and I'm pretty sure there's a new one available.
>
> Also for your list, I think we need a "What's New in 1.1?" page for
> the web site above and beyond the release notes.
>
> As far as the deadlines go, there are a lot of outstanding console
> fixes that ought to / need to go into 1.1 (there's a patch for the DB
> pools for 1.1 and I think the JMS one needs some attention and there
> are a lot of other console JIRAs to review). I'm not sure I'll get it
> all together by tomorrow, but we can still make that the "freeze date"
> so long as the fixes to existing console functions can continue to go
> in.
>
> Finally, I have some thoughts I've put together on my goals/vision for
> Geronimo. Should I wait until after 1.1 to get into that discussion?
> (I'm not sure that's a good idea; I think we might want to have
> something to say along those lines when we're going through the 1.1
> release publicity.)
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
> On 4/17/06, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
>
>>We're nearing the end of the CTS cycle and will soon have a stable 1.1. Once we reach this critical
>>stage we need to move into the final stages to release 1.1. Here is my proposed list.
>>
>>*Starting now:*
>>1. Code freeze for 2006/04/18 23:59 PST (except bug and performance fixes)
>>
>>*Once we've reached CTS stable:* (feel free to volunteer for tasks)
>>1. Begin changing packages to upgrade as appropriate (proposed list below)
>>2. Develop *Release Notes*
>>3. Draft a *Press Release*
>>4. Begin performance regression
>>5. SWAG a date Release Candidate
>>6. Test, Test, Test
>>
>>*After 1.1 is stable:*
>>1. Formalize strategy for syncing 1.1 and HEAD
>>2. Define a set of release goals for 1.2 and propose a target date
>> I suggest that we define a theme for a release to help the group focus on a set of goals
>> that will guide the work for the next release. This is not intended to be a rigid
>> constraint but merely to provide some direction. It will also help us define a target
>> release date to help us deliver on a consistent schedule for our users.
>>3. Solicit user feedback for prioritizing work
>> Listening to our users and providing them with the features they want.
>>4. Aggressively update our dependent package versions to new new levels.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Matt
>>
>>*Version Upgrades - Matt's Suggestions*
>>I looked at the packages out there and here is the first stab at which ones we should upgrade.
>>Comments?
>>
>> *G* *Available*
>>*Version* *Package* *Version* *Version*
>>1.1 activemq 3.2.1 3.2.3
>>1.1 castor 0.9.5.3 0.9.9.1 or 1.0M3
>>1.1 daytrader 1.1-SNAPSHOT 1.1-SNAPSHOT
>>1.1 derby 10.0.2.1 10.1.2.1
>>1.1 derby 10.1.1.0 10.1.2.1
>>1.1 jasper 5.5.9 5.5.15
>>1.1 jasper 5.5.12 5.5.15
>>1.1 jetty 5.1.9 5.1.10
>>1.1 openejb 2.1-SNAPSHOT 2.1-SNAPSHOT
>>1.1 stax 1.1.1-dev 1.1.2
>>1.1 tomcat 5.5.9 5.5.15
>>1.1 tomcat_ajp 5.5.9 5.5.15
>>1.1 tranql 1.2.1 1.3-SNAPSHOT
>>1.1 tranql_connector 1.1 1.2-SNAPSHOT
>>
>
>
>
>
Re: 1.1 Release (Version Upgrades)
Posted by John Sisson <jr...@gmail.com>.
Aaron Mulder wrote:
> We need to update commons-fileupload for 1.1 if it doesn't terribly --
> the current one hangs occasionally (when the console processes upload
> files) and I'm pretty sure there's a new one available.
>
There is an update available and has a JIRA for it: GERONIMO-1756 .
> Also for your list, I think we need a "What's New in 1.1?" page for
> the web site above and beyond the release notes.
>
> As far as the deadlines go, there are a lot of outstanding console
> fixes that ought to / need to go into 1.1 (there's a patch for the DB
> pools for 1.1 and I think the JMS one needs some attention and there
> are a lot of other console JIRAs to review). I'm not sure I'll get it
> all together by tomorrow, but we can still make that the "freeze date"
> so long as the fixes to existing console functions can continue to go
> in.
>
> Finally, I have some thoughts I've put together on my goals/vision for
> Geronimo. Should I wait until after 1.1 to get into that discussion?
> (I'm not sure that's a good idea; I think we might want to have
> something to say along those lines when we're going through the 1.1
> release publicity.)
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
> On 4/17/06, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
>
>> We're nearing the end of the CTS cycle and will soon have a stable 1.1. Once we reach this critical
>> stage we need to move into the final stages to release 1.1. Here is my proposed list.
>>
>> *Starting now:*
>> 1. Code freeze for 2006/04/18 23:59 PST (except bug and performance fixes)
>>
>> *Once we've reached CTS stable:* (feel free to volunteer for tasks)
>> 1. Begin changing packages to upgrade as appropriate (proposed list below)
>> 2. Develop *Release Notes*
>> 3. Draft a *Press Release*
>> 4. Begin performance regression
>> 5. SWAG a date Release Candidate
>> 6. Test, Test, Test
>>
>> *After 1.1 is stable:*
>> 1. Formalize strategy for syncing 1.1 and HEAD
>> 2. Define a set of release goals for 1.2 and propose a target date
>> I suggest that we define a theme for a release to help the group focus on a set of goals
>> that will guide the work for the next release. This is not intended to be a rigid
>> constraint but merely to provide some direction. It will also help us define a target
>> release date to help us deliver on a consistent schedule for our users.
>> 3. Solicit user feedback for prioritizing work
>> Listening to our users and providing them with the features they want.
>> 4. Aggressively update our dependent package versions to new new levels.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> *Version Upgrades - Matt's Suggestions*
>> I looked at the packages out there and here is the first stab at which ones we should upgrade.
>> Comments?
>>
>> *G* *Available*
>> *Version* *Package* *Version* *Version*
>> 1.1 activemq 3.2.1 3.2.3
>> 1.1 castor 0.9.5.3 0.9.9.1 or 1.0M3
>> 1.1 daytrader 1.1-SNAPSHOT 1.1-SNAPSHOT
>> 1.1 derby 10.0.2.1 10.1.2.1
>> 1.1 derby 10.1.1.0 10.1.2.1
>> 1.1 jasper 5.5.9 5.5.15
>> 1.1 jasper 5.5.12 5.5.15
>> 1.1 jetty 5.1.9 5.1.10
>> 1.1 openejb 2.1-SNAPSHOT 2.1-SNAPSHOT
>> 1.1 stax 1.1.1-dev 1.1.2
>> 1.1 tomcat 5.5.9 5.5.15
>> 1.1 tomcat_ajp 5.5.9 5.5.15
>> 1.1 tranql 1.2.1 1.3-SNAPSHOT
>> 1.1 tranql_connector 1.1 1.2-SNAPSHOT
>>
>>
>
>
Re: 1.1 Release (Version Upgrades)
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
We need to update commons-fileupload for 1.1 if it doesn't terribly --
the current one hangs occasionally (when the console processes upload
files) and I'm pretty sure there's a new one available.
Also for your list, I think we need a "What's New in 1.1?" page for
the web site above and beyond the release notes.
As far as the deadlines go, there are a lot of outstanding console
fixes that ought to / need to go into 1.1 (there's a patch for the DB
pools for 1.1 and I think the JMS one needs some attention and there
are a lot of other console JIRAs to review). I'm not sure I'll get it
all together by tomorrow, but we can still make that the "freeze date"
so long as the fixes to existing console functions can continue to go
in.
Finally, I have some thoughts I've put together on my goals/vision for
Geronimo. Should I wait until after 1.1 to get into that discussion?
(I'm not sure that's a good idea; I think we might want to have
something to say along those lines when we're going through the 1.1
release publicity.)
Thanks,
Aaron
On 4/17/06, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> We're nearing the end of the CTS cycle and will soon have a stable 1.1. Once we reach this critical
> stage we need to move into the final stages to release 1.1. Here is my proposed list.
>
> *Starting now:*
> 1. Code freeze for 2006/04/18 23:59 PST (except bug and performance fixes)
>
> *Once we've reached CTS stable:* (feel free to volunteer for tasks)
> 1. Begin changing packages to upgrade as appropriate (proposed list below)
> 2. Develop *Release Notes*
> 3. Draft a *Press Release*
> 4. Begin performance regression
> 5. SWAG a date Release Candidate
> 6. Test, Test, Test
>
> *After 1.1 is stable:*
> 1. Formalize strategy for syncing 1.1 and HEAD
> 2. Define a set of release goals for 1.2 and propose a target date
> I suggest that we define a theme for a release to help the group focus on a set of goals
> that will guide the work for the next release. This is not intended to be a rigid
> constraint but merely to provide some direction. It will also help us define a target
> release date to help us deliver on a consistent schedule for our users.
> 3. Solicit user feedback for prioritizing work
> Listening to our users and providing them with the features they want.
> 4. Aggressively update our dependent package versions to new new levels.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Matt
>
> *Version Upgrades - Matt's Suggestions*
> I looked at the packages out there and here is the first stab at which ones we should upgrade.
> Comments?
>
> *G* *Available*
> *Version* *Package* *Version* *Version*
> 1.1 activemq 3.2.1 3.2.3
> 1.1 castor 0.9.5.3 0.9.9.1 or 1.0M3
> 1.1 daytrader 1.1-SNAPSHOT 1.1-SNAPSHOT
> 1.1 derby 10.0.2.1 10.1.2.1
> 1.1 derby 10.1.1.0 10.1.2.1
> 1.1 jasper 5.5.9 5.5.15
> 1.1 jasper 5.5.12 5.5.15
> 1.1 jetty 5.1.9 5.1.10
> 1.1 openejb 2.1-SNAPSHOT 2.1-SNAPSHOT
> 1.1 stax 1.1.1-dev 1.1.2
> 1.1 tomcat 5.5.9 5.5.15
> 1.1 tomcat_ajp 5.5.9 5.5.15
> 1.1 tranql 1.2.1 1.3-SNAPSHOT
> 1.1 tranql_connector 1.1 1.2-SNAPSHOT
>
Re: 1.1 Release (Version Upgrades)
Posted by Hernan Cunico <hc...@gmail.com>.
Hi All,
I'll be happy to work on the *RELEASE-NOTES*, there are many things in common with the documentation.
I need your input to build a thorough list with all the changes (major and minor) from the previous
release. We need a "Summary of changes" section in the release notes and that list will need to be
expanded in the 1.1 documentation to cover more in detail the impact of those changes in current
installation. The more complete and detailed the better.
As an example, here are some of the topics that should be covered in detail on that list:
- Deployment plans
- Repository
- Geronimo plugins
- ...
Any help will be very much appreciated :)
Cheers!
Hernan
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> We're nearing the end of the CTS cycle and will soon have a stable 1.1.
> Once we reach this critical stage we need to move into the final stages
> to release 1.1. Here is my proposed list.
>
> *Starting now:*
> 1. Code freeze for 2006/04/18 23:59 PST (except bug and performance fixes)
>
> *Once we've reached CTS stable:* (feel free to volunteer for tasks)
> 1. Begin changing packages to upgrade as appropriate (proposed list below)
> 2. Develop *Release Notes*
> 3. Draft a *Press Release*
> 4. Begin performance regression
> 5. SWAG a date Release Candidate
> 6. Test, Test, Test
>
> *After 1.1 is stable:*
> 1. Formalize strategy for syncing 1.1 and HEAD
> 2. Define a set of release goals for 1.2 and propose a target date
> I suggest that we define a theme for a release to help the group
> focus on a set of goals
> that will guide the work for the next release. This is not intended
> to be a rigid
> constraint but merely to provide some direction. It will also help
> us define a target
> release date to help us deliver on a consistent schedule for our users.
> 3. Solicit user feedback for prioritizing work
> Listening to our users and providing them with the features they want.
> 4. Aggressively update our dependent package versions to new new levels.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Matt
>
> *Version Upgrades - Matt's Suggestions*
> I looked at the packages out there and here is the first stab at which
> ones we should upgrade. Comments?
>
> *G* *Available*
> *Version* *Package* *Version* *Version*
> 1.1 activemq 3.2.1 3.2.3
> 1.1 castor 0.9.5.3 0.9.9.1 or 1.0M3
> 1.1 daytrader 1.1-SNAPSHOT 1.1-SNAPSHOT
> 1.1 derby 10.0.2.1 10.1.2.1
> 1.1 derby 10.1.1.0 10.1.2.1
> 1.1 jasper 5.5.9 5.5.15
> 1.1 jasper 5.5.12 5.5.15
> 1.1 jetty 5.1.9 5.1.10
> 1.1 openejb 2.1-SNAPSHOT 2.1-SNAPSHOT
> 1.1 stax 1.1.1-dev 1.1.2
> 1.1 tomcat 5.5.9 5.5.15
> 1.1 tomcat_ajp 5.5.9 5.5.15
> 1.1 tranql 1.2.1 1.3-SNAPSHOT
> 1.1 tranql_connector 1.1 1.2-SNAPSHOT
>
Re: 1.1 Release (Version Upgrades)
Posted by John Sisson <jr...@gmail.com>.
Currently the 1.1 branch is using activemq 3.2.4-SNAPSHOT. The activemq
version should be 3.2.4 (once the activemq 3.2.4 release is finalised).
Hiram and djencks have done some work (including fixes) on the
activemq-3 branch at:
svn://svn.activemq.org/activemq/scm/branches/activemq-3
I assume that all the available versions you list containing SNAPSHOTs
will be changed to a non-SNAPSHOT release.
John
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> We're nearing the end of the CTS cycle and will soon have a stable
> 1.1. Once we reach this critical stage we need to move into the final
> stages to release 1.1. Here is my proposed list.
>
> *Starting now:*
> 1. Code freeze for 2006/04/18 23:59 PST (except bug and performance
> fixes)
>
> *Once we've reached CTS stable:* (feel free to volunteer for tasks)
> 1. Begin changing packages to upgrade as appropriate (proposed list
> below)
> 2. Develop *Release Notes*
> 3. Draft a *Press Release*
> 4. Begin performance regression
> 5. SWAG a date Release Candidate
> 6. Test, Test, Test
>
> *After 1.1 is stable:*
> 1. Formalize strategy for syncing 1.1 and HEAD
> 2. Define a set of release goals for 1.2 and propose a target date
> I suggest that we define a theme for a release to help the group
> focus on a set of goals
> that will guide the work for the next release. This is not
> intended to be a rigid
> constraint but merely to provide some direction. It will also help
> us define a target
> release date to help us deliver on a consistent schedule for our
> users.
> 3. Solicit user feedback for prioritizing work
> Listening to our users and providing them with the features they want.
> 4. Aggressively update our dependent package versions to new new levels.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Matt
>
> *Version Upgrades - Matt's Suggestions*
> I looked at the packages out there and here is the first stab at which
> ones we should upgrade. Comments?
>
> *G* *Available*
> *Version* *Package* *Version* *Version*
> 1.1 activemq 3.2.1 3.2.3
> 1.1 castor 0.9.5.3 0.9.9.1 or 1.0M3
> 1.1 daytrader 1.1-SNAPSHOT 1.1-SNAPSHOT
> 1.1 derby 10.0.2.1 10.1.2.1
> 1.1 derby 10.1.1.0 10.1.2.1
> 1.1 jasper 5.5.9 5.5.15
> 1.1 jasper 5.5.12 5.5.15
> 1.1 jetty 5.1.9 5.1.10
> 1.1 openejb 2.1-SNAPSHOT 2.1-SNAPSHOT
> 1.1 stax 1.1.1-dev 1.1.2
> 1.1 tomcat 5.5.9 5.5.15
> 1.1 tomcat_ajp 5.5.9 5.5.15
> 1.1 tranql 1.2.1 1.3-SNAPSHOT
> 1.1 tranql_connector 1.1 1.2-SNAPSHOT
>