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

Posted to log4j-dev@logging.apache.org by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> on 2016/02/21 07:22:41 UTC

release possibilities

Hi All:

Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us to
consider the following:

Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new low/no-GC
code (ByteBufferDestination and all).

Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and no/low
GC.

This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.

Thoughts?

Gary

-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: release possibilities

Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.

Sounds good to me, too.

On 21 February 2016 at 12:57, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:

> :-)
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Then it's settled, "Chubby 2.6" it is :-P
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Gary
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I can’t do a release this weekend and would really like
>>> traceEntry(gson->toJson(request)) and traceExit(gson->toJson(response)) or
>>> their Message variations to work in the next release.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> On Feb 21, 2016, at 4:48 AM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I am comfortable with the fatter release, unless there is urgency to
>>> quickly release one of the bug fixes.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Forget the release number for a minute and just consider this: Do we
>>>> want to release without the 'radical' ;-) new stuff (flow APIs, low/no-GC)
>>>> ASAP because we have a lot of changes already. Or, are we more comfortable
>>>> with a fatter release later, with more changes, which may feel less stable
>>>> and more disruptive depending on your POV and taste for change.
>>>>
>>>> This is all mod Ralph's availability as RM unless someone else wants to
>>>> pick up the task.
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That does sound like a 2.5.1 release. I'd be fine with a 2.5.1
>>>>> release. If it's already changed enough to warrant 2.6 semantically, we
>>>>> might as well finish our other 2.6 work first.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 21 February 2016 at 02:11, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Depending on whether we can get consensus on a Logger API without
>>>>>> varargs, I estimate I am about a week away from finishing the code changes
>>>>>> for the GC-free epic. I would then want to do performance tests and do a
>>>>>> write-up, which is another week or two.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would prefer including this work in the 2.6 release, but if the
>>>>>> consensus is to do a release soon without the GC-free epic I won't object.
>>>>>> -Remko
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Without the flow logging API changes and gc-free stuff it would just
>>>>>>> be a 2.5.1 release, no?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory <
>>>>>>> garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch
>>>>>>>> master into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <
>>>>>>>> garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us
>>>>>>>>> to consider the following:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new
>>>>>>>>> low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing
>>>>>>>>> and no/low GC.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>
>


-- 
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>

Re: release possibilities

Posted by Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>.

:-)

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Then it's settled, "Chubby 2.6" it is :-P
>
> Thank you,
> Gary
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I can’t do a release this weekend and would really like
>> traceEntry(gson->toJson(request)) and traceExit(gson->toJson(response)) or
>> their Message variations to work in the next release.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On Feb 21, 2016, at 4:48 AM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I am comfortable with the fatter release, unless there is urgency to
>> quickly release one of the bug fixes.
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Forget the release number for a minute and just consider this: Do we
>>> want to release without the 'radical' ;-) new stuff (flow APIs, low/no-GC)
>>> ASAP because we have a lot of changes already. Or, are we more comfortable
>>> with a fatter release later, with more changes, which may feel less stable
>>> and more disruptive depending on your POV and taste for change.
>>>
>>> This is all mod Ralph's availability as RM unless someone else wants to
>>> pick up the task.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> That does sound like a 2.5.1 release. I'd be fine with a 2.5.1 release.
>>>> If it's already changed enough to warrant 2.6 semantically, we might as
>>>> well finish our other 2.6 work first.
>>>>
>>>> On 21 February 2016 at 02:11, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Depending on whether we can get consensus on a Logger API without
>>>>> varargs, I estimate I am about a week away from finishing the code changes
>>>>> for the GC-free epic. I would then want to do performance tests and do a
>>>>> write-up, which is another week or two.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would prefer including this work in the 2.6 release, but if the
>>>>> consensus is to do a release soon without the GC-free epic I won't object.
>>>>> -Remko
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Without the flow logging API changes and gc-free stuff it would just
>>>>>> be a 2.5.1 release, no?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch
>>>>>>> master into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <
>>>>>>> garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us
>>>>>>>> to consider the following:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new
>>>>>>>> low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and
>>>>>>>> no/low GC.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>

Re: release possibilities

Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.

Then it's settled, "Chubby 2.6" it is :-P

Thank you,
Gary

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:

> I can’t do a release this weekend and would really like
> traceEntry(gson->toJson(request)) and traceExit(gson->toJson(response)) or
> their Message variations to work in the next release.
>
> Ralph
>
> On Feb 21, 2016, at 4:48 AM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I am comfortable with the fatter release, unless there is urgency to
> quickly release one of the bug fixes.
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Forget the release number for a minute and just consider this: Do we want
>> to release without the 'radical' ;-) new stuff (flow APIs, low/no-GC) ASAP
>> because we have a lot of changes already. Or, are we more comfortable with
>> a fatter release later, with more changes, which may feel less stable and
>> more disruptive depending on your POV and taste for change.
>>
>> This is all mod Ralph's availability as RM unless someone else wants to
>> pick up the task.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> That does sound like a 2.5.1 release. I'd be fine with a 2.5.1 release.
>>> If it's already changed enough to warrant 2.6 semantically, we might as
>>> well finish our other 2.6 work first.
>>>
>>> On 21 February 2016 at 02:11, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Depending on whether we can get consensus on a Logger API without
>>>> varargs, I estimate I am about a week away from finishing the code changes
>>>> for the GC-free epic. I would then want to do performance tests and do a
>>>> write-up, which is another week or two.
>>>>
>>>> I would prefer including this work in the 2.6 release, but if the
>>>> consensus is to do a release soon without the GC-free epic I won't object.
>>>> -Remko
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Without the flow logging API changes and gc-free stuff it would just
>>>>> be a 2.5.1 release, no?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch
>>>>>> master into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <
>>>>>> garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us
>>>>>>> to consider the following:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new
>>>>>>> low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and
>>>>>>> no/low GC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>
>
>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: release possibilities

Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.

I can’t do a release this weekend and would really like traceEntry(gson->toJson(request)) and traceExit(gson->toJson(response)) or their Message variations to work in the next release. 

Ralph

> On Feb 21, 2016, at 4:48 AM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I am comfortable with the fatter release, unless there is urgency to quickly release one of the bug fixes.
> 
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Forget the release number for a minute and just consider this: Do we want to release without the 'radical' ;-) new stuff (flow APIs, low/no-GC) ASAP because we have a lot of changes already. Or, are we more comfortable with a fatter release later, with more changes, which may feel less stable and more disruptive depending on your POV and taste for change.
> 
> This is all mod Ralph's availability as RM unless someone else wants to pick up the task.
> 
> Gary
> 
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> That does sound like a 2.5.1 release. I'd be fine with a 2.5.1 release. If it's already changed enough to warrant 2.6 semantically, we might as well finish our other 2.6 work first.
> 
> On 21 February 2016 at 02:11, Remko Popma <remko.popma@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Depending on whether we can get consensus on a Logger API without varargs, I estimate I am about a week away from finishing the code changes for the GC-free epic. I would then want to do performance tests and do a write-up, which is another week or two.
> 
> I would prefer including this work in the 2.6 release, but if the consensus is to do a release soon without the GC-free epic I won't object.
> -Remko
> 
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Remko Popma <remko.popma@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Without the flow logging API changes and gc-free stuff it would just be a 2.5.1 release, no?
> 
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch master into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff.
> 
> Gary
> 
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi All:
> 
> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us to consider the following:
> 
> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all).
> 
> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and no/low GC.
> 
> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Gary
> 
> -- 
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> | ggregory@apache.org  <ma...@apache.org>
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com <http://garygregory.wordpress.com/> 
> Home: http://garygregory.com/ <http://garygregory.com/>
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory <http://twitter.com/GaryGregory>
> 
> 
> -- 
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> | ggregory@apache.org  <ma...@apache.org>
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com <http://garygregory.wordpress.com/> 
> Home: http://garygregory.com/ <http://garygregory.com/>
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory <http://twitter.com/GaryGregory>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> | ggregory@apache.org  <ma...@apache.org>
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com <http://garygregory.wordpress.com/> 
> Home: http://garygregory.com/ <http://garygregory.com/>
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory <http://twitter.com/GaryGregory>

Re: release possibilities

Posted by Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>.

I am comfortable with the fatter release, unless there is urgency to
quickly release one of the bug fixes.

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Forget the release number for a minute and just consider this: Do we want
> to release without the 'radical' ;-) new stuff (flow APIs, low/no-GC) ASAP
> because we have a lot of changes already. Or, are we more comfortable with
> a fatter release later, with more changes, which may feel less stable and
> more disruptive depending on your POV and taste for change.
>
> This is all mod Ralph's availability as RM unless someone else wants to
> pick up the task.
>
> Gary
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That does sound like a 2.5.1 release. I'd be fine with a 2.5.1 release.
>> If it's already changed enough to warrant 2.6 semantically, we might as
>> well finish our other 2.6 work first.
>>
>> On 21 February 2016 at 02:11, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Depending on whether we can get consensus on a Logger API without
>>> varargs, I estimate I am about a week away from finishing the code changes
>>> for the GC-free epic. I would then want to do performance tests and do a
>>> write-up, which is another week or two.
>>>
>>> I would prefer including this work in the 2.6 release, but if the
>>> consensus is to do a release soon without the GC-free epic I won't object.
>>> -Remko
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Without the flow logging API changes and gc-free stuff it would just be
>>>> a 2.5.1 release, no?
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch
>>>>> master into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us to
>>>>>> consider the following:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new
>>>>>> low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and
>>>>>> no/low GC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>

Re: release possibilities

Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.

Forget the release number for a minute and just consider this: Do we want
to release without the 'radical' ;-) new stuff (flow APIs, low/no-GC) ASAP
because we have a lot of changes already. Or, are we more comfortable with
a fatter release later, with more changes, which may feel less stable and
more disruptive depending on your POV and taste for change.

This is all mod Ralph's availability as RM unless someone else wants to
pick up the task.

Gary

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That does sound like a 2.5.1 release. I'd be fine with a 2.5.1 release. If
> it's already changed enough to warrant 2.6 semantically, we might as well
> finish our other 2.6 work first.
>
> On 21 February 2016 at 02:11, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Depending on whether we can get consensus on a Logger API without
>> varargs, I estimate I am about a week away from finishing the code changes
>> for the GC-free epic. I would then want to do performance tests and do a
>> write-up, which is another week or two.
>>
>> I would prefer including this work in the 2.6 release, but if the
>> consensus is to do a release soon without the GC-free epic I won't object.
>> -Remko
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Without the flow logging API changes and gc-free stuff it would just be
>>> a 2.5.1 release, no?
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch
>>>> master into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff.
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>
>>>>> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us to
>>>>> consider the following:
>>>>>
>>>>> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new
>>>>> low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all).
>>>>>
>>>>> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and
>>>>> no/low GC.
>>>>>
>>>>> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>



-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: release possibilities

Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.

That does sound like a 2.5.1 release. I'd be fine with a 2.5.1 release. If
it's already changed enough to warrant 2.6 semantically, we might as well
finish our other 2.6 work first.

On 21 February 2016 at 02:11, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Depending on whether we can get consensus on a Logger API without varargs,
> I estimate I am about a week away from finishing the code changes for the
> GC-free epic. I would then want to do performance tests and do a write-up,
> which is another week or two.
>
> I would prefer including this work in the 2.6 release, but if the
> consensus is to do a release soon without the GC-free epic I won't object.
> -Remko
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Without the flow logging API changes and gc-free stuff it would just be a
>> 2.5.1 release, no?
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch master
>>> into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi All:
>>>>
>>>> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us to
>>>> consider the following:
>>>>
>>>> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new
>>>> low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all).
>>>>
>>>> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and
>>>> no/low GC.
>>>>
>>>> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>

Re: release possibilities

Posted by Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>.

Depending on whether we can get consensus on a Logger API without varargs,
I estimate I am about a week away from finishing the code changes for the
GC-free epic. I would then want to do performance tests and do a write-up,
which is another week or two.

I would prefer including this work in the 2.6 release, but if the consensus
is to do a release soon without the GC-free epic I won't object.
-Remko

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Without the flow logging API changes and gc-free stuff it would just be a
> 2.5.1 release, no?
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch master
>> into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All:
>>>
>>> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us to
>>> consider the following:
>>>
>>> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new
>>> low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all).
>>>
>>> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and
>>> no/low GC.
>>>
>>> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>
>

Re: release possibilities

Posted by Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>.

Without the flow logging API changes and gc-free stuff it would just be a
2.5.1 release, no?

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch master
> into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff.
>
> Gary
>
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All:
>>
>> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us to
>> consider the following:
>>
>> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new
>> low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all).
>>
>> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and
>> no/low GC.
>>
>> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>

Re: release possibilities

Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.

FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch master
into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff.

Gary

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi All:
>
> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us to
> consider the following:
>
> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new
> low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all).
>
> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and no/low
> GC.
>
> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Gary
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>



-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory