Just some thoughts: Shouldn't well known and essential bugs be fixed before doing the branch? This could prevent duplicated work. For example: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-715
Bye the way: Would the subprojects like OpenEJB be part of the branch of M4? I assume this because this modules are an essential part of geronimo and have to be closely synchronized with the rest. Greetings mos On 7/10/05, Aaron Mulder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK, I've finished the following: > - fix the deployer to not echo your password > - fix the deployer to not be totally silent > - give the deployer a custom message for the case where RuntimeDeployer > is not deployed > - make sure exceptions propogate to the deploy tool well > - fix problem where var/config/config.list is never updated > > The main other thing I really want to get into M4 is: > - get a release of ActiveMQ more recent than 7/8 (so our port list will > show the ActiveMQ port) > > And "would be nice but don't plan to do this myself": > - have a sample web app set as the default so localhost:8080 doesn't 404 > - add a shutdown JAR, or management JAR with shutdown implemented > - have startup/shutdown/deploy scripts > - provide a bundled or linked MC4J release > > But just to reiterate, I'm fine with branching now. > > Thanks, > Aaron > > On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, David Blevins wrote: > > Alright, it's been a few days since this was proposed, going to move > > forward as there didn't seem to be any objections. > > > > (As a note to people who really want to get > > features in before we release; good! Let's > > release again very very soon!) > > > > > > If you are in the middle of something, get to the end of it quick :) > > > > If you were thinking of starting something big, wait till tomorrow at this > > time. > > > > If you would prefer we delay creating the branch a day or two (and have > > good reason for holding up the show), speak up. > > > > -David > > >
