+1
We should aim for a 0.8.0 release candidate soon as well.
What else do we need after an M1 before we can have 0.8.0? Should we
just go straight for 0.8.0?!
Aled
On 31/08/2015 17:31, Alex Heneveld wrote:
Hi folks,
Now that the package rename is pretty much done, I'd like to get an
080-M1 out, maybe kick this off tomorrow?
This will be nice for users who have been disrupted by the rename!!
With #873 ready for review we can even offer backwards compatibility
for persisted state, although any user java code will have to have
imports optimized (or if you prefer, run a `sed -i` over the code
based on `deserializedClassRenames.properties` -- we should document
this in the release notes -- any volunteers for that?).
We'll go through the existing PR's and finish the scan of plans/docs
(as discussed at #873), but if there are any other pieces of work let
us know.
@Hadrian -- are there more renames to come to remove the OSGi split
packages?
Best
Alex
--
Cloudsoft Corporation Limited, Registered in Scotland No: SC349230.
Registered Office: 13 Dryden Place, Edinburgh, EH9 1RP
This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If
the message is received by anyone other than the addressee, please return
the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message
from your computer. Internet e-mails are not necessarily secure. Cloudsoft
Corporation Limited does not accept responsibility for changes made to this
message after it was sent.
Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to avoid the transmission of
viruses, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that the
onward transmission, opening or use of this message and any attachments
will not adversely affect its systems or data. No responsibility is
accepted by Cloudsoft Corporation Limited in this regard and the recipient
should carry out such virus and other checks as it considers appropriate.
