Alex, I'm afraid I won't have bandwidth to shepherd a release this week. We should also address the IPMC notes on our last release, and do a last call on this list for important PRs. I might then be able to RM next week.
Richard. On 1 September 2015 at 22:28, Alex Heneveld <[email protected]> wrote: > @Richard - It was my plan to be RM but #fail. Could you? (My attempts > seem like they've fried my GPU about 3 hours ago. Maven and Mavericks are > definitely not friends. To be fair it looks like this is a known problem > with the 2012 MBPr's.) > > I've made the branches, dunno how far it got uploading builds. > > @Hadrian- That would be helpful! > > Best > Alex > > > On 1 September 2015 at 21:46, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We also need to make sure we incorporate all the feedback from the >> incubator vote on the previous release. I will go through it again this >> evening. >> >> Hadrian >> >> >> On 09/01/2015 03:53 PM, Richard Downer wrote: >> >>> Hi Alex, >>> >>> Are you up for being RM for this one? >>> >>> Richard. >>> >>> On 1 September 2015 at 17:03, Alex Heneveld >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Hi all- >>>> >>>> +1 to no need for milestones. There are quite a few goodies in any case >>>> beyond the package refactoring which is huge! See them here: >>>> >>>> >>>> https://brooklyn.incubator.apache.org/v/0.8.0-SNAPSHOT/misc/release-notes.html >>>> >>>> [still uploading so you may have to wait a bit] >>>> >>>> I've compiled new release notes and uploaded updated snapshot docs. This >>>> includes updated catalog items and javadocs. I've also made the >>>> downloads >>>> and versions more prominent (and fixed broken links), completed >>>> persistence >>>> compatibility for the package refactoring (#873), and merged a few other >>>> PR's outstanding. >>>> >>>> The release notes include a MIGRATION GUIDE, linked from above. >>>> >>>> If there are any last comments, or other NEW FEATURES deserve a mention, >>>> speak up. >>>> >>>> Otherwise roll on 0.8.0-RC1 ! >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Alex >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 01/09/2015 08:54, Richard Downer wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'd be in favour of 0.8.0. It'd be great to iterate much faster on >>>>> releases. I assume under semantic versioning that we don't have to >>>>> stop when we reach 0.9 :-) >>>>> >>>>> Richard. >>>>> >>>>> On 31 August 2015 at 18:56, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 for 0.8.0. I don't see a lot of value in a milestone release at this >>>>>> point. >>>>>> >>>>>> Alex, re: package split, I don't think so, but even if we discover >>>>>> something >>>>>> it shouldn't be a blocker. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hadrian >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 08/31/2015 12:55 PM, Aled Sage wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +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. >>>> >>> > > -- > 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.
