+1. I reviewed the change for 316 and am comfortable with it. Regarding the "simple" things pushed off, that doesn't worry me much, its just more reason to cut another release soon. I haven't looked at the issue list lately but for the one I did in Feb, I applied all the patches I could find that worked. So that's a way of saying patches will get things fixed faster.
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Jörg Schaible <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > Stephen Connolly wrote: > >> I have a critical need for MDEP-316. >> >> It took 2 days to get this to a state where it could actually be released. >> >> There are no vetos for Apache releases, > > I know and my vote isn't even binding, I simply express my embarrassment. > >> (as release manager for this >> release) my intention is to continue with this release. >> >> I have no issue pushing fixes after we have this out the door... but >> the difference in behaviour between M2 and M3 in the copy and unpack >> goals is IMHO critical. > > All those issues simply fix typos in code or Javadoc that prevents either > the proper usage of a goal or one of its parameters. Nothing more. Therefore > it is so embarrassing that they are *again* simply ignored. > >> If the patches for those issues apply clean and the tests all pass, I >> am more than happy to roll a 2.3.1 while this vote is in progress. > > It's not the first time, that I've been told this. Some day it simply starts > to annoy, especially if something happens like here MDEP-231. > > - Jörg > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
