+1 from me too. On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 - seems reasonable to me. > > Colm. > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 5:24 PM, larry mccay <[email protected]> wrote: > > > All - > > > > I think that we have come to the point where we need to start branching > for > > release candidates and we have yet to be able to merge the KNOX-998 > > repackaging branch into master or provide a patch that can easily be > tried > > by the community. > > > > While I don't really like the idea of kicking the 1.0.0 can down the road > > again, there may be some benefit in releasing 0.14.0 with the current > > package names and then immediately turning around another release as > 1.0.0. > > > > Possible benefits: > > > > * Though very minimal, there may be some risk of the repackaging > > introducing some instability > > * It is possible that some deployments have extended the existing > packages > > and will break with an upgrade > > * Some deployments may want to get new features in 0.14.0 without having > to > > take on the repackaging in 1.0.0 > > * Downstream consumers of Knox modules may like to backport fixes in > 0.14.0 > > to previous versions and repackaging will make that more difficult > > > > So, I propose that we branch now (or very soon) for 0.14.0, get an RC > going > > and a release out the door. Immediately following the release of 0.14.0 > we > > can merge the KNOX-998 branch into master and branch for 1.0.0. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > --larry > > > > > > -- > Colm O hEigeartaigh > > Talend Community Coder > http://coders.talend.com >
