On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 23:41 +0100, Rob Oxspring wrote: > Hi, > > I just had a go at building from the 1.0 tag and realised that it still > relies on the old commons/build system and uses Apache License 1.1. > > I've spent this evening merging changes from the trunk to the 1.x > branch, including both changes that bring it in line with the current > build system and licence requirements AND bugfixes applied to the 1.0 > code. I've lined this up as the commons-cli-1.1: > > http://people.apache.org/~roxspring/cli/distributions/ > > Alternatively we should be able to build a 1.0.1 as described below by > reverting to the old build system releasing under the old licence, but > I'm not sure if that is desirable. > > Thoughts?
I'm in favour of a 1.0.1 with minimal changes. If we release anything with new features, then people currently using 1.0 can't just update their dependency to 1.0.1 and rebuild; they will need to do a complete QA cycle on their code - which can be a major piece of work for large projects. And if the release has new features etc. here at commons we would need a proper release cycle too: * update RELEASE-NOTES * create release candidates * inspect release candidates * get people to test release candidates Normally this sort of thing takes at least a week. Rushing any of this through increases the chance of a bad release being generated - which would be disastrous when trying to fix a former release problem. So I'm still in favour of: cd cli/tags svn cp CLI_1_0 CLI_1_0_1 svn commit CLI_1_0_1 then updating CLI_1_0_1 with any absolutely necessary fixes, like: * update the version# in project.xml * update the website to explain the issue I think the rule about new Apache releases requiring the 2.0 license can be relaxed in this case; it's really a "re-release" not a new release. The commons-build stuff is a little trickier; it would be nice if the 1.0.1 website had the new look-and-feel. I don't know how much work this would be. Still, it's reasonably safe work as the jar isn't affected. Working towards a 1.1 release immediately after the 1.0.1 has been pushed out would be fine - but it could then be done in a relaxed manner rather than trying to rush it. Regards, Simon --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
