I have started the 0.2 release, so no rush. If needed we can do a point release, or get to 0.3 sooner.
Aaron On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Chris Rohr <[email protected]> wrote: > Do you want me to try to get the console finished before code freeze? > > On Sep 4, 2013, at 6:29 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I have been reading through the release notes (I know that we will be > > making changes to them as needed). Should we branch for the release > > "0.2-dev" and tag "0.2.0" so that we know what was in the release? Or > > should we branch each time? So that "0.2.0" is a branch, and we branch > > from "0.2.0" to make "0.2.1"? > > > > On side a note, I think that unless there is a bug fix needed for "0.2.0" > > that we should just work toward "0.3.0" and have that release within a > > month. What do you all think? > > > > Aaron > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Awesome thanks Chris! And good luck! > >> > >> Aaron > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Chris Rohr <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >>> I just commented on the Blur Console ticket with the last remaining > items > >>> that don't work. I can try to fix them tonight (assuming my wife > doesn't > >>> go into labor). > >>> > >>> Chris > >>> > >>> On Sep 4, 2013, at 6:55 AM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> That is good with me. I do have one request. Can I leave the factory > >>> code I put in to allow for the creation of the block cache? It's > pretty > >>> harmless code and has no effect on configuration. Once I remove the v2 > >>> block cache I think we can consider a code freeze. > >>>> > >>>> Aaron > >>>> > >>>> Sent from my iPhone > >>>> > >>>> On Sep 3, 2013, at 11:14 PM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I meant to add, I reckon this'd mean we'd pull back the block > cache-v2 > >>>>> stuff for this release... > >>>>> > >>>>> On Tuesday, September 3, 2013, Tim Williams wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> I've been editing HowToRelease[1] in anticipation of an upcoming > >>>>>> release. I'd like to propose instead that we just do the release > and > >>>>>> edit that with the commands/procedures that we actually perform. The > >>>>>> rationale is that some of preferred methods have changed (e.g. > >>>>>> svn-based vs. p.a.o/dist) and it'd be easiest for the RM to just > >>>>>> update it as they go along. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Are there any open issues blocking a release? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Can we consider a code-freeze on master for a couple days? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If no to both, any problems with creating a release candidate > tomorrow > >>>>>> and letting it run 72hrs? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Or, an alternate proposal? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> --tim > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [1] - https://wiki.apache.org/blur/HowToRelease > >>>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >
