On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 8:00 AM Peng Zheng <pengzh...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> As I know, Zhenbao Xu will make a PR, reviving RSA-shm and fixing the
> following issues:
>
> https://github.com/apache/celix/issues/417
> https://github.com/apache/celix/issues/425
>
> Maybe we could wait for that PR merged?

It has been quite a while since we last released Celix (2020-05), so I
prefer to release Celix as it is now.

The excuse/reason why this release took so long has to do with the
introduction of C++ api and the decision whether to do this as
separate libs, header only or a complete new framework impl and which
C++ version (11,14,17 or 20).
And because these decisions are now made (C++17 support as header only
on to of the C api), we should be able to release more frequently.

In other words I would prefer to release now and make a new release
(2.4.0) when the above mentioned issues are resolved.


>
> On 7/10/22 22:53, Pepijn Noltes wrote:
> > This is the release vote for Apache Celix, version 2.3.0.
> >
> > It fixes the following issues:
> >
> > Source files:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/celix/celix-2.3.0/
> >
> > The commit ID to be voted upon:
> > a03cd54755a7b3736914296852070ab663ce628f
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/celix/commit/a03cd54755a7b3736914296852070ab663ce628f
> >
> > Celix's keys can be found at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/celix/KEYS
> >
> > Information for voting on a release can be found at:
> > https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#approving-a-release
> >
> > Please vote to approve this release:
> >
> > [ ] +1 Approve the release
> > [ ] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments)
> >
> > Note that an Apache release needs to be a Majority Approval (requires
> > at-least 3 binding +1 votes and more +1 votes than -1 votes).
> >
> > If this release is approved I will promote it to an official release
> > (e.g. move from dist/dev to dist/release and tagging the release in git)
> >
> > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
>
> --
> Peng Zheng
>

Reply via email to