Yes, the goal is still to release asap. I did run full tests and the trunk is stable. There are a few fixes I committed today and I want a confirmation from Jenkins that nightly builds work too. There are a couple of known intermittent failures in mqtt I may have to disable or try to fix today.
Cheers, Hadrian On Wednesday 05 March 2014 13:09:57 Paul Gale wrote: > Given that both CXF and Camel have been released are there any remaining > issues preventing the ActiveMQ 5.10 release from being cut? > > If none, can 5.10 be released this week? > > Thanks, > Paul > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> wrote: > > Will do. Looks like we're waiting for the vote on cxf 2.7.10 then. As > > soon as artifacts are published I'll release camel and then activemq. > > Hadrian > > > > On 02/06/2014 02:50 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Paul Gale <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> If release 5.10.0 of ActiveMQ is going to be cut then you might as > >>> well update the bundled Camel from 2.12.1 to 2.12.2, no? According to > >>> the Camel site this dot release contains 145 fixes. > >>> > >>> Yes I have logged ticket for this > >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5030 > >> > >> We need to release Camel first and then upgrade AMQ to include the > >> latest Camel release. > >> The Camel source code on 2.12 branch is ready for release, so if you > >> have free cycles then IMHO its better to start with Camel and then > >> afterwards AMQ. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >>> Paul > >>> > >>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 3:32 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> Hi Hadrian, > >>>> > >>>> I have some OSGi related enhancements and fixes to push, but nothing > >>>> blocker > >>>> for the release (the blockers haven been already pushed). > >>>> > >>>> Regards > >>>> JB > >>>> > >>>> On 2014-02-05 18:15, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote: > >>>>> I have enough cycles to cut a 5.10.0 this week off of the current > >>>>> trunk as Hiram suggested. Is there any issue/fix I should wait for? > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Hadrian > >>>>> > >>>>> On 02/03/2014 10:41 AM, Hiram Chirino wrote: > >>>>>> I think it's safest to to just call trunk 5.10 now since it is > >>>>>> taking away some functionality. Would be nice to get some RCs going > >>>>>> soon since trunk is stable right now. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea > >>>>>> <[email protected]> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I am still planning to release 5.9.1. We need to figure out if we > >>>>>>> want > >>>>>>> to > >>>>>>> cut 5.9.1 off of the current trunk at a stable checkpoint, or > >>>>>>> branch it > >>>>>>> off > >>>>>>> 5.9.0 and just select the relevant patches. While the feedback on > >>>>>>> this > >>>>>>> list > >>>>>>> is not conclusive (and I personally favor the 1st approach) I > >>>>>>> believe most > >>>>>>> would favor the 2nd approach. Last week there were over 200 patches > >>>>>>> that > >>>>>>> we'd have to look through and backport. The fastest we could get > >>>>>>> through > >>>>>>> this the sooner we'll have the release, I hope before mid Feb. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>> Hadrian > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 01/30/2014 03:31 PM, kal123 wrote: > >>>>>>>> There were post for cutting 5.9.1 any update on timeline for this? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> View this message in context: > >>>>>>>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/activemq-5-9-1-tp4677074.htm > >>>>>>>>l Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
