Good, this means according to [1] that some PMC has to setup the
hudson build (or give me the required permissions to do it myself :)).

kind regards,
andreas

[1] http://wiki.apache.org/general/Hudson

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Jamie G. <[email protected]> wrote:
> That sounds like a good idea for the snapshot builds :)
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Andreas Pieber <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Basically I've no problems with that; but I think we really should
>> provide hudson builds (and automate deploys to apache-snapshot repos)
>> for all supported branches, don't you think?
>>
>> kind regards,
>> andreas
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Jamie G. <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi Andreas,
>>>
>>> It doesn't appear that we have a written policy for Karaf maintenance.
>>> In general we reserve trunk for new development, and the patch
>>> branches for bug fixes (and the rare improvement that does not break
>>> backwards compatibility).
>>>
>>> Right now the current active support is on the 2.1.x branch and main
>>> trunk. After the 2.2.0 release occurs then we will have the 2.1.x,
>>> 2.2.x, and the new trunk as active lines. I do not believe we have a
>>> planned discontinue of support for the earlier releases, if such was
>>> to be considered I'm sure that we would have an open discussion and
>>> vote on the matter. Personally, as long as bug fixes are being
>>> submitted to past branches I'm more than happy to spin up a release
>>> candidate for consideration & vote.
>>>
>>> If anyone else knows better on the subject please help clarify the matter :)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jamie
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 3:36 AM, Andreas Pieber <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Hey,
>>>>
>>>> I've seen that there had been a commit to karaf-2.0.x branch; do we still
>>>> support it? What is the maintenance "policy" for karaf? Which versions do 
>>>> we
>>>> officially support? Only the latest stable release (e.g. 2.1.x for now)?
>>>> Where do we "have" to back-port bug-fixes... E.g. if I find a problem in 
>>>> 2.1.2;
>>>> do I have to also fix it in 2.0.x (if it exists there)?
>>>>
>>>> In addition to this question: IMHO we should also setup Hudson build 
>>>> targets for
>>>> all "officially" supported versions to make bug-fixes easier and faster
>>>> available via snapshots in the apache snapshot repository.
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas? Are there already guidelines documented anywhere?
>>>>
>>>> kind regards,
>>>> andreas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to