Even if it were almost complete, which it doesnt sound like it is,
such a significant change would still seem better positioned for a
5.17.0 at this point than dropped into an almost-ready 5.16.0 at the
last moment.

Either way I would suggest updating the draft report to be clearer as
it doesnt currently read in line with the below, saying "5.16.0 will
be an important milestone with full JDK 9+ support and JMS 2.0 support
as well."

The example skeleton on reporter.apache.org doesnt include the stats
from what I recall as they often asked folks not to include them, so
I'd drop those. I just give a summary line in reports.

Robbie

On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 at 12:06, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Robbie,
>
> yeah, 5.16.0 is still my top priority and it's almost ready. JDK 9+ is
> OK (including on Karaf). JMS 2.0 is "optional" for 5.16.0 (but I think
> it's worth to try to have it). So, it's more an indication in terms of
> "best effort", not a strong commitment.
> In term of timeline, 5.16.0 could be submitted to vote end of next week.
>
> For the report, we should use the reporter.apache.org that create the
> report skeleton for us.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 06/01/2020 11:53, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> > You mentioned on the 5.15.11 vote thread that a 5.16.0 vote would
> > happen in late November, but it was suggested to skip that particular
> > week and so folks had returned from holidays around US Thanksgiving.
> > Its been a bit longer now, but is the intent still to release 5.16.0
> > very soon? I ask as the text added in the report draft indicates
> > 5.16.0 will include JMS 2 support, but there doesnt seem to have been
> > work committed on that as yet. If thats the case it would seem
> > surprising to include in 5.16.0 at this point, several weeks after
> > indication it was primed for release, instead of say doing 5.16.0 and
> > only then adding potentially large changes afterwards towards a 5.17.0
> > following the needed time to bake them.
> >
> > The mailing list stats should probably be removed from the report, and
> > just a summary line given. The board have in the past typically asked
> > for the stats not to be c&p from the reporter tool unless they show
> > important details. It seems like all they show is that it was a
> > holiday filled quarter and so some things were lower volume than the
> > prior one without thier effect.
> >
> > I tweaked the 5.15.11 release info to use its actual Nov 25th release date.
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 at 07:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Bruce,
> >>
> >> Happy new year to you as well !
> >>
> >> I added some content about ActiveMQ (releases, stats, overall activity).
> >> Please let me know if it's OK for you.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> JB
> >>
> >> On 06/01/2020 06:28, Bruce Snyder wrote:
> >>> Happy New Year everyone!
> >>>
> >>> Please take a few minutes of your time to submit your contributions to the
> >>> latest report to the ASF board:
> >>>
> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=144509735
> >>>
> >>> This report must be submitted by Jan 8, so please don't wait.
> >>>
> >>> Bruce
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >> jbono...@apache.org
> >> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com

Reply via email to