It would also seem, that we are going to have top level modules doing either one of the release processes for some time.
I think it would be best, if we can get to a single release process - but that may take some time. I think there are two things we should vote on to make this concrete: a) each top-level-module MUST use either the old 'release by bundle' approach OR the new 'release by top-level-module' approach. b) we favour projects moving the 'release by top-level-module' approach i.e. saying what we prefer as a community, without putting the onus on a release manager to do the conversion the next time a release is needed. I'll leave this thread going for a while for more discussion before opening a vote thread. Thanks, Jeremy On 13 July 2015 at 14:05, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok, that sounds fair. Subsystem is another one. Would you have a > chance to document how you approached converting the JPA module (ok so > I know you reimplemented at the same time :-) ... so that others can > use the same approach for other modules? > > Jeremy > > On 13 July 2015 at 14:04, Christian Schneider <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Jeremy, >> >> yes it was the intent. It is quite some work to convert a submodule to the >> new release process though. So I think the best approach is to convert each >> module >> at a certain point and do submodule releases from then on. >> As long as a submodule is not converted I propose we continue doing releases >> in the per bundle style. So we have a smooth transition and do not hold off >> releases. >> >> Christian >> >> >> On 13.07.2015 14:37, Jeremy Hughes wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> We had a discussion at the end of May about changing out release >>> process to release at the top level module only. I've just realised >>> this release vote was for sub-modules and that really we should have >>> done a full Blueprint release. >>> >>> Christian, that was the intent wasn't it? >>> >>> I guess next time :-) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Jeremy >>> >>> On 2 July 2015 at 21:46, Sergey Beryozkin <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> This vote passes with 4 binding +1s. >>>> >>>> I'll promote the artifacts >>>> Thanks all >>>> Sergey >>>> >>>> On 29/06/15 16:56, Sergey Beryozkin wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi All >>>>> >>>>> This is a vote to support the release of blueprint-parser-1.3.1, >>>>> blueprint-noosgi-1.1.1, blueprint-web 1.1.1. >>>>> >>>>> The staging repository for blueprint-parser-1.3.1 is at >>>>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-1027 >>>>> >>>>> The staging repository for blueprint-noosgi-1.1.1 and >>>>> blueprint-web-1.1.1 is at >>>>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-1028 >>>>> >>>>> The following issues have been addressed: >>>>> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARIES-1322 >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARIES-1323 >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARIES-1334 >>>>> >>>>> A servlet-based deployment of Blueprint contexts with custom namespace >>>>> handlers will work better in non OSGI environments after the release. >>>>> >>>>> The vote is open for the next 72 hours, here is my +1, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, Sergey >>>>> >> >> >> -- >> Christian Schneider >> http://www.liquid-reality.de >> >> Open Source Architect >> http://www.talend.com >>
