I agree with Robbie, it's a -1 from me to try and include JMS 2.0 at this point in 5.16.0 as it's way too late to try and add such a big change. It needs to be 5.17.0 or higher.
On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 7:23 AM Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 >
