You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cayenne.apache.org by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> on 2006/08/16 16:27:43 UTC
release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1
I think now is a good time to release the bug fixes that we've made
since 1.2 final and also start the process of releasing 2.0 via the
incubator.
So how about 1.2.1 sometime next week?
Re 2.0 (I suggest to call it 2.0.1 to match the patch level with 1.2
branch).
* still waiting for 2 CLA's to be recorded.
* nobody replied to my legal-discuss message here - http://
tinyurl.com/naf3g - but I assume we are ok with the exe created by NSIS
* I rewrote most of the code not covered by CLA's. One thing that
remained is a single file (DB2 pk generator). Will do that shortly.
Other than that we are good to go.
Andrus
Re: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:48 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> (I guess you can't just open Jira issues for each one of them,
> instead of replying on the mailing list).
Whoops - I meant the opposite - you CAN open Jira issues.
Andrus
Re: CAY-614 [Was: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1]
Posted by Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>.
On 8/16/06, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
>
> On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
>
> > The toMany list toString and bug fix are the two I'm specifically
> > thinking about.
>
> Mike, I just applied your CAY-614 fix to 2.0 branch and HEAD. From
> your earlier message my understanding was that you will only work
> with 1.2 branch. I was wrong on that, sorry for stepping on your toes.
No, you're not wrong. I'm only planning on working on 1.2 for now.
Nothing to apologize for. Thanks for taking care of this and
catching the failed unit test -- I probably would have caught this a
little later when I started working on outer joins, but it's
embarrassing none the less.
Re: CAY-614 [Was: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1]
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Aug 16, 2006, at 2:47 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> So I can plan my future upgrade accordingly -- Is 2.0 going to be 1.2
> with only the packages renamed?
Although originally I thought we might forgo patching 2.0 with 1.2
bug fixes, till now this hasn't been a big deal and the two are in
sync. Let's try to keep it that way in the future. In addition to
package renaming there were some changes related to IP clearance.
Those should not affect anybody I think.
> And new development is only occuring on 3.0? Just bug fixes on 2.0?
Yes.
Andrus
Re: CAY-614 [Was: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1]
Posted by Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>.
On 8/16/06, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
>
> > The toMany list toString and bug fix are the two I'm specifically
> > thinking about.
>
> Mike, I just applied your CAY-614 fix to 2.0 branch and HEAD. From
> your earlier message my understanding was that you will only work
> with 1.2 branch. I was wrong on that, sorry for stepping on your toes.
So I can plan my future upgrade accordingly -- Is 2.0 going to be 1.2
with only the packages renamed?
And new development is only occuring on 3.0? Just bug fixes on 2.0?
Re: CAY-614 [Was: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1]
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Aug 16, 2006, at 2:38 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> I was wrong on that, sorry for stepping on your toes.
Damn... another typing disorder. This should read "IF I was wrong..."
Should get some sleep :-)
Andrus
CAY-614 [Was: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1]
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> The toMany list toString and bug fix are the two I'm specifically
> thinking about.
Mike, I just applied your CAY-614 fix to 2.0 branch and HEAD. From
your earlier message my understanding was that you will only work
with 1.2 branch. I was wrong on that, sorry for stepping on your toes.
Andrus
Re: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
>> Cool - as long as we track all the patches to be able to port them to
>> HEAD later. BTW, since there were no plans to maintain new features
>> on the official 1.2 branch, you can probably copy 1.2 branch to 1.2-
>> outer-joins or something, to still maintain the code under SCM.
>
> Actually, that's probably a good idea. I hadn't considered that. It
> should make merging the changes easier (although I don't know how hard
> it is to merge when the package names change).
Merging has been pretty easy so far. What I normally do is open a
patch file in a text editor and do search-n-replace of the imports
and file paths (since 3.0 is also mavenized, so the structure is
different).
Andrus
Re: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1
Posted by Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>.
On 8/16/06, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> > I'll try to get my 1.2.1 patches in later today.
>
> Great! What are the specific patches that you have? (I guess you
> can't just open Jira issues for each one of them, instead of replying
> on the mailing list).
These are the ones that I opened issues for and haven't resolved yet :-)
The toMany list toString and bug fix are the two I'm specifically
thinking about.
Not sure if I have any others pending yet.
> > I also have need to to start working on my auditing needs again and
> > outer join support, at least for Oracle. I will probably take a stab
> > at adding outer join support this week as well. At this point, I
> > need all of this against 1.2 -- I don't have the option of refactoring
> > all of my code to use a new package, but I can at least provide some
> > patches in a Jira issue.
>
> Cool - as long as we track all the patches to be able to port them to
> HEAD later. BTW, since there were no plans to maintain new features
> on the official 1.2 branch, you can probably copy 1.2 branch to 1.2-
> outer-joins or something, to still maintain the code under SCM.
Actually, that's probably a good idea. I hadn't considered that. It
should make merging the changes easier (although I don't know how hard
it is to merge when the package names change).
Re: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:40 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> I've just now cleared up some time and can do some Cayenne-specific
> work.
> I'll try to get my 1.2.1 patches in later today.
Great! What are the specific patches that you have? (I guess you
can't just open Jira issues for each one of them, instead of replying
on the mailing list).
> I also have need to to start working on my auditing needs again and
> outer join support, at least for Oracle. I will probably take a stab
> at adding outer join support this week as well. At this point, I
> need all of this against 1.2 -- I don't have the option of refactoring
> all of my code to use a new package, but I can at least provide some
> patches in a Jira issue.
Cool - as long as we track all the patches to be able to port them to
HEAD later. BTW, since there were no plans to maintain new features
on the official 1.2 branch, you can probably copy 1.2 branch to 1.2-
outer-joins or something, to still maintain the code under SCM.
Andrus
Re: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1
Posted by Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>.
I've just now cleared up some time and can do some Cayenne-specific work.
I'll try to get my 1.2.1 patches in later today.
I also have need to to start working on my auditing needs again and
outer join support, at least for Oracle. I will probably take a stab
at adding outer join support this week as well. At this point, I
need all of this against 1.2 -- I don't have the option of refactoring
all of my code to use a new package, but I can at least provide some
patches in a Jira issue.
On 8/16/06, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> I think now is a good time to release the bug fixes that we've made
> since 1.2 final and also start the process of releasing 2.0 via the
> incubator.
>
> So how about 1.2.1 sometime next week?
>
>
> Re 2.0 (I suggest to call it 2.0.1 to match the patch level with 1.2
> branch).
>
> * still waiting for 2 CLA's to be recorded.
> * nobody replied to my legal-discuss message here - http://
> tinyurl.com/naf3g - but I assume we are ok with the exe created by NSIS
> * I rewrote most of the code not covered by CLA's. One thing that
> remained is a single file (DB2 pk generator). Will do that shortly.
>
> Other than that we are good to go.
>
> Andrus
>
Re: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
An update on 2.0.1...
On Aug 16, 2006, at 6:27 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> * still waiting for 2 CLA's to be recorded.
That's down to just one. Sigh... this will never end.
> * nobody replied to my legal-discuss message here - http://
> tinyurl.com/naf3g - but I assume we are ok with the exe created by
> NSIS
Got a reply from Cliff - we are clean: http://tinyurl.com/fzfha
> * I rewrote most of the code not covered by CLA's. One thing that
> remained is a single file (DB2 pk generator). Will do that shortly.
Still needs to be done.
Andrus
Re: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Aug 16, 2006, at 6:27 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> I think now is a good time to release the bug fixes that we've made
> since 1.2 final and also start the process of releasing 2.0 via the
> incubator.
>
> So how about 1.2.1 sometime next week?
Dragging my foot on that. Probably will have some time next week to
post the release.
Andrus
Re: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:43 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> On 8/16/06, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
>> * nobody replied to my legal-discuss message here - http://
>> tinyurl.com/naf3g - but I assume we are ok with the exe created by
>> NSIS
>
> I didn't reply to your GPL ant task comment as I was hoping someone
> more knowledgeable would, but I don't think we're allowed to have any
> [L]GPL code committed. I'm not sure of the details of how this is
> working, but I would recommend rewriting the ant task if you can do it
> in an hour, just to bypass the issue altogether.
Fair enough. I was more concerned about the .exe policies.
Andrus
Re: release schedule - 1.2.1 and 2.0.1
Posted by Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>.
On 8/16/06, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> * nobody replied to my legal-discuss message here - http://
> tinyurl.com/naf3g - but I assume we are ok with the exe created by NSIS
I didn't reply to your GPL ant task comment as I was hoping someone
more knowledgeable would, but I don't think we're allowed to have any
[L]GPL code committed. I'm not sure of the details of how this is
working, but I would recommend rewriting the ant task if you can do it
in an hour, just to bypass the issue altogether.