Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

I was hit by https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1478 (updatesite resolver sets ext token to empty rather than jar); also, it seems illogical that jars directory in the cache contains jar.pack files, whereas the actual jar files are in jars_unpacked... anybody interested to discuss? Gintas

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

Is the version number agreed upon? For IvyDE builds think the latest version of Ivy is 2.5.0.alpha_20161213000915 Gintas 2016-12-15 17:53 GMT+01:00 Matt Sicker : > I'd definitely agree with the consistency principle. > > On 15 December 2016 at 01:38, Stefan Bodewig

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

I'd definitely agree with the consistency principle. On 15 December 2016 at 01:38, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2016-12-14, Matt Sicker wrote: > > > When it comes to version numbers, I'm more concerned about following > > semantic versioning than whether or not it's a major

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

On 2016-12-14, Matt Sicker wrote: > When it comes to version numbers, I'm more concerned about following > semantic versioning than whether or not it's a major release. Bugfixes > warrant micro version updates, while new features warrant minor version > updates (and backward incompatible API

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

When it comes to version numbers, I'm more concerned about following semantic versioning than whether or not it's a major release. Bugfixes warrant micro version updates, while new features warrant minor version updates (and backward incompatible API changes are for the major version). On 14

RE: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

I'd like to add my vote for a 2.4.1 release. We don't want to raise the expectation that there will be substantial new functionality (which would warrant a 2.5.0 version). However, if the 2.4.1 release goes well I would certainly suggest that we aim for a 2.5.0 release in the second half of

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

Maarten, thanks for volunteering to review the PRs. One of them has a test case. I will add a test for the other one. It looks like you have been involved with Ivy development and releases before, so I think you would be in a better position to decide if it should be 2.5.0 or 2.4.1. I personally

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

On 2016-12-12, Maarten Coene wrote: > We also have to find a release manager. I did it in the past when we > were on SVN, but I don't have enough GIT knowledge (and I don't have > the time to look into it) to do a new release. Maarten, is this

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

Thanks Jaikran, I will look at your patches, I'll try to do it this week.If possible, please attach a junit test as well to reproduce the problem. About the release, the master branch already contains some fixes since the 2.4.0 release. They are listed in the release-notes.html in the 'doc'

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

Sounds fine then. -Jaikiran On Monday, December 12, 2016, Matt Sicker wrote: > Issues in the release process? Those would be handled by multiple release > candidates. People normally only use alphas and betas for new projects or > new major versions of projects at Apache. > >

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

Issues in the release process? Those would be handled by multiple release candidates. People normally only use alphas and betas for new projects or new major versions of projects at Apache. On 11 December 2016 at 19:53, J Pai wrote: > I'm fine calling it a 2.4.1. The

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

I'm fine calling it a 2.4.1. The only reason I mentioned it as a beta is to iron out any issues involved in the process itself which, from what I read in the other thread, might involve certain challenges for the first time. -Jaikiran On Sunday, December 11, 2016, Matt Sicker

Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release

Do we really need a beta release? If you're working on bugfixes first, then a regular 2.4.1 release would be great. It would go through the normal Apache release candidate process, and perhaps we could get some Gradle developers to test it out as well since they still seem to be big users of Ivy.