You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@sling.apache.org by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> on 2016/11/01 07:24:51 UTC

Re: sling releases - deploy to OBR?

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 11:09 PM, Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de> wrote:
> ...do we still support OBR as deployment target? or should we just remove
> it from our relase management process...

I suggest removing it, and if someone complains we can re-add.

As you mention, many recent releases haven't been added there, so it's
out of sync anyway.

-Bertrand

Re: sling releases - deploy to OBR?

Posted by Sandro Boehme <sa...@gmx.de>.

I personally used it as good as possible but also recognized that 
bundles were not available so I had to put it in my own OBR at some point.
If I'm the only one it may not pay off to support it and I would be fine 
be remove the OBR support.

Best,

Sandro

Am 01.11.16 um 08:24 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 11:09 PM, Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de> wrote:
>> ...do we still support OBR as deployment target? or should we just remove
>> it from our relase management process...
>
> I suggest removing it, and if someone complains we can re-add.
>
> As you mention, many recent releases haven't been added there, so it's
> out of sync anyway.
>
> -Bertrand
>

RE: sling releases - deploy to OBR?

Posted by Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de>.

i've removed the OBR step from the list of mandatory steps of our release process [1], and marked the appendix as "obsolete".

stefan

[1] http://sling.apache.org/documentation/development/release-management.html


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:bdelacretaz@apache.org]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 8:25 AM
>To: dev
>Subject: Re: sling releases - deploy to OBR?
>
>On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 11:09 PM, Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de>
>wrote:
>> ...do we still support OBR as deployment target? or should we just remove
>> it from our relase management process...
>
>I suggest removing it, and if someone complains we can re-add.
>
>As you mention, many recent releases haven't been added there, so it's
>out of sync anyway.
>
>-Bertrand