You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cxf.apache.org by Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com> on 2014/06/18 15:32:03 UTC
Should we introduce 3.1.0 Trunk
Hi
Should we introduce 3.1.0 trunk and 3.0.x branch respectively ?
May be we should wait till 2.6.x is closed first...
Thanks, Sergey
Re: Should we introduce 3.1.0 Trunk
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
On Jun 19, 2014, at 8:55 AM, Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andriy
> On 19/06/14 12:47, Andrey Redko wrote:
>> Hi Sergey,
>>
>> Just some thoughts on that: if we have features for 3.1 already in
>> work, it makes sense to introduce new branch for 3.1.x
>> I might be wrong but it seems like 3.0.x is going to be a mainstream for
>> a while and as such should stay a trunk.
>
> Well, I hope 3.0.1 will be released soon enough to address the issues already found in 3.0.0, while releasing 3.1.0 can take its time, 3.1.0 can take more of new changes (like more advanced Java 8 support Dan has talked about, etc)
Yep. There’s a couple of snapshots that need to cycle through (Santuario, WSS4J) that once done, I plan on doing 3.0.1/2.7.12 and the final 2.6.x release. Then create the branch.
Dan
>
> Thanks, Sergey
>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Andriy Redko
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@gmail.com
>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Should we introduce 3.1.0 trunk and 3.0.x branch respectively ?
>> May be we should wait till 2.6.x is closed first...
>>
>> Thanks, Sergey
>>
>>
>
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
Re: Should we introduce 3.1.0 Trunk
Posted by Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>.
Hi Andriy
On 19/06/14 12:47, Andrey Redko wrote:
> Hi Sergey,
>
> Just some thoughts on that: if we have features for 3.1 already in
> work, it makes sense to introduce new branch for 3.1.x
> I might be wrong but it seems like 3.0.x is going to be a mainstream for
> a while and as such should stay a trunk.
Well, I hope 3.0.1 will be released soon enough to address the issues
already found in 3.0.0, while releasing 3.1.0 can take its time, 3.1.0
can take more of new changes (like more advanced Java 8 support Dan has
talked about, etc)
Thanks, Sergey
> Thanks.
>
> Best Regards,
> Andriy Redko
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Should we introduce 3.1.0 trunk and 3.0.x branch respectively ?
> May be we should wait till 2.6.x is closed first...
>
> Thanks, Sergey
>
>
Re: Should we introduce 3.1.0 Trunk
Posted by Andrey Redko <dr...@gmail.com>.
Hi Sergey,
Just some thoughts on that: if we have features for 3.1 already in work,
it makes sense to introduce new branch for 3.1.x
I might be wrong but it seems like 3.0.x is going to be a mainstream for a
while and as such should stay a trunk.
Thanks.
Best Regards,
Andriy Redko
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi
>
> Should we introduce 3.1.0 trunk and 3.0.x branch respectively ?
> May be we should wait till 2.6.x is closed first...
>
> Thanks, Sergey
>