You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@archiva.apache.org by Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> on 2014/01/10 04:55:10 UTC
2.0.0 Release time
Yup it's new year so I believe it's release time for a hot 2.0.0! :-)
Any objections?
Cheers,
--
Olivier Lamy
Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
Re: 2.0.0 Release time
Posted by Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>.
nope no delete tag and respin (OMG I already read this discussion
somewhere else :-) )
On 14 January 2014 18:04, Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, Olivier, is that "a delete the tag and respin" answer or not?
>
> -Chris
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 14 January 2014 10:52, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 14 Jan 2014, at 9:34 am, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 13 January 2014 12:02, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>> Would it make sense to go through some RC cycles? We should plan some
>> specific promotion of the 2.0.0 release once it is GA.
>> >>
>> >> I believe we already did 1.4-M1 to M4 (this sounds already RC for me
>> :-) )
>> >
>> > I was thinking more like the typical Maven releases - in other words, if
>> we put up 2.0.0 for vote and it fails, what happens next? Re-spin 2.0.0,
>> move to 2.0.1, or do we start out with some 2.0.0-RCx releases until it's
>> good? Or do we do more snapshot testing until we already have a passable
>> number of +1's and then just vote on 2.0.0 then?
>> >
>> RCx some good for a major release. I can start working with a RC branch.
>>
>> But I'd like we use the Tomcat model (move from 2.0.0 to 2.0.1 etc..
>> and keep the tag in svn) but for IMHO make more sense to have 2.0.0
>> first before a 2.0.1 :-)
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Definitely like to see releases moving forward. I know I've been slack
>> on testing recently... unfortunately this week is particularly bad as I'm
>> fully booked up already :)
>> >>
>> >> Releasing will be more than a week. So no worries you will have time to
>> test :P
>> >
>> > Thanks :)
>> >
>> > - Brett
>> >
>> > --
>> > Brett Porter @brettporter
>> > http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
>> > http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Olivier Lamy
>> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>
--
Olivier Lamy
Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
Re: 2.0.0 Release time
Posted by Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com>.
Sorry, Olivier, is that "a delete the tag and respin" answer or not?
-Chris
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 14 January 2014 10:52, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 14 Jan 2014, at 9:34 am, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 13 January 2014 12:02, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> Would it make sense to go through some RC cycles? We should plan some
> specific promotion of the 2.0.0 release once it is GA.
> >>
> >> I believe we already did 1.4-M1 to M4 (this sounds already RC for me
> :-) )
> >
> > I was thinking more like the typical Maven releases - in other words, if
> we put up 2.0.0 for vote and it fails, what happens next? Re-spin 2.0.0,
> move to 2.0.1, or do we start out with some 2.0.0-RCx releases until it's
> good? Or do we do more snapshot testing until we already have a passable
> number of +1's and then just vote on 2.0.0 then?
> >
> RCx some good for a major release. I can start working with a RC branch.
>
> But I'd like we use the Tomcat model (move from 2.0.0 to 2.0.1 etc..
> and keep the tag in svn) but for IMHO make more sense to have 2.0.0
> first before a 2.0.1 :-)
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Definitely like to see releases moving forward. I know I've been slack
> on testing recently... unfortunately this week is particularly bad as I'm
> fully booked up already :)
> >>
> >> Releasing will be more than a week. So no worries you will have time to
> test :P
> >
> > Thanks :)
> >
> > - Brett
> >
> > --
> > Brett Porter @brettporter
> > http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
> > http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>
Re: 2.0.0 Release time
Posted by Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>.
On 14 January 2014 10:52, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 14 Jan 2014, at 9:34 am, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 13 January 2014 12:02, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Would it make sense to go through some RC cycles? We should plan some specific promotion of the 2.0.0 release once it is GA.
>>
>> I believe we already did 1.4-M1 to M4 (this sounds already RC for me :-) )
>
> I was thinking more like the typical Maven releases - in other words, if we put up 2.0.0 for vote and it fails, what happens next? Re-spin 2.0.0, move to 2.0.1, or do we start out with some 2.0.0-RCx releases until it's good? Or do we do more snapshot testing until we already have a passable number of +1's and then just vote on 2.0.0 then?
>
RCx some good for a major release. I can start working with a RC branch.
But I'd like we use the Tomcat model (move from 2.0.0 to 2.0.1 etc..
and keep the tag in svn) but for IMHO make more sense to have 2.0.0
first before a 2.0.1 :-)
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> Definitely like to see releases moving forward. I know I've been slack on testing recently... unfortunately this week is particularly bad as I'm fully booked up already :)
>>
>> Releasing will be more than a week. So no worries you will have time to test :P
>
> Thanks :)
>
> - Brett
>
> --
> Brett Porter @brettporter
> http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
> http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
>
--
Olivier Lamy
Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
Re: 2.0.0 Release time
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 14 Jan 2014, at 9:34 am, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 13 January 2014 12:02, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Would it make sense to go through some RC cycles? We should plan some specific promotion of the 2.0.0 release once it is GA.
>
> I believe we already did 1.4-M1 to M4 (this sounds already RC for me :-) )
I was thinking more like the typical Maven releases - in other words, if we put up 2.0.0 for vote and it fails, what happens next? Re-spin 2.0.0, move to 2.0.1, or do we start out with some 2.0.0-RCx releases until it's good? Or do we do more snapshot testing until we already have a passable number of +1's and then just vote on 2.0.0 then?
>
>>
>> Definitely like to see releases moving forward. I know I've been slack on testing recently... unfortunately this week is particularly bad as I'm fully booked up already :)
>
> Releasing will be more than a week. So no worries you will have time to test :P
Thanks :)
- Brett
--
Brett Porter @brettporter
http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
Re: 2.0.0 Release time
Posted by Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>.
On 13 January 2014 12:02, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> Would it make sense to go through some RC cycles? We should plan some specific promotion of the 2.0.0 release once it is GA.
I believe we already did 1.4-M1 to M4 (this sounds already RC for me :-) )
>
> Definitely like to see releases moving forward. I know I've been slack on testing recently... unfortunately this week is particularly bad as I'm fully booked up already :)
Releasing will be more than a week. So no worries you will have time to test :P
>
> - Brett
>
> On 10 Jan 2014, at 3:29 pm, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Feel free to download from here:
>> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Archiva/job/archiva-all-maven-3.x-jdk-1.6/
>>
>> builds #2218 +
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10 January 2014 15:16, Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Do we have a stable build that I can at least test first?
>>> Which jenkins job should I take a build from and quickly test?
>>> -Chris
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yup it's new year so I believe it's release time for a hot 2.0.0! :-)
>>>>
>>>> Any objections?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> --
>>>> Olivier Lamy
>>>> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
>>>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Olivier Lamy
>> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>
> --
> Brett Porter @brettporter
> http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
> http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
>
--
Olivier Lamy
Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
Re: 2.0.0 Release time
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
Would it make sense to go through some RC cycles? We should plan some specific promotion of the 2.0.0 release once it is GA.
Definitely like to see releases moving forward. I know I've been slack on testing recently... unfortunately this week is particularly bad as I'm fully booked up already :)
- Brett
On 10 Jan 2014, at 3:29 pm, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> Feel free to download from here:
> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Archiva/job/archiva-all-maven-3.x-jdk-1.6/
>
> builds #2218 +
>
>
>
> On 10 January 2014 15:16, Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Do we have a stable build that I can at least test first?
>> Which jenkins job should I take a build from and quickly test?
>> -Chris
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Yup it's new year so I believe it's release time for a hot 2.0.0! :-)
>>>
>>> Any objections?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> --
>>> Olivier Lamy
>>> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
>>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
--
Brett Porter @brettporter
http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
Re: 2.0.0 Release time
Posted by Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>.
Feel free to download from here:
https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Archiva/job/archiva-all-maven-3.x-jdk-1.6/
builds #2218 +
On 10 January 2014 15:16, Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do we have a stable build that I can at least test first?
> Which jenkins job should I take a build from and quickly test?
> -Chris
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Yup it's new year so I believe it's release time for a hot 2.0.0! :-)
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> Olivier Lamy
>> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>
--
Olivier Lamy
Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
Re: 2.0.0 Release time
Posted by Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com>.
Do we have a stable build that I can at least test first?
Which jenkins job should I take a build from and quickly test?
-Chris
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> Yup it's new year so I believe it's release time for a hot 2.0.0! :-)
>
> Any objections?
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>