Hi Sean,
I can and will help tomorrow. I have some stuff to do in my day job
but I'll make time for the branch.
If I understand things correctly we are going to delete the 1.1.0.1
branch I created the other day and create another branch set from the
current trunk and turn that into the release then create a tag when
done and merge all changes into the trunk.
Do I have that correct? I want to make sure before I start deleting
branches :-)
TTFN,
-bd-
On Sep 26, 2005, at 4:22 PM, Sean Schofield wrote:
We'll need to coordinate the creation of the branch with the version
change in JIRA. Bill are you available to create the branch tomorrow?
If so, please touch base with me tomorrow and we will begin together
(assuming no major objections overnight.) For now keep marking things
fixed in "nightly" and check into the trunk.
sean
On 9/26/05, Bruno Aranda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1 I like option #3. Thus the show stoppers will also be fixed, and
let's test thoroughly this time :-) ...
Regards,
Bruno
2005/9/27, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
The trunk does not have my fix to the build but it does have yours.
My changes don't matter anymore since we settled on a different
option
for the sandbox problem. So we are fine to drop the old branch once
we are in agreement.
Lets wait until tomorrow and give some of the Europeans a chance to
weigh in during business hours. If we get a few more +1 then we can
create the branch and pursue option #3
We just need to remind all committers that they should check urgent
bug fixes into the branch only and the rest goes into the trunk
only.
Also, all JIRA issues should be caefully scrutinized before
closing so
we can generate proper release notes off them.
Lets make the branch short lived. Fix everything we can this
week and
build the RC over the weekend. Let people test the RC next week and
then start the mirroring over the weekend and release on Monday.
sean
On 9/26/05, Bill Dudney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd like to get the branch 'closed' as soon as possible so I'm in
favor of either 1.1.0.1 as a patch release (option 1) to get the
myfaces-all problem resolved then start rolling on a 1.1.1 release
(option 3).
If we don't do the maintenance release then the branch IMO
should be
deleted, which would be fine with me (i.e. I'm not emotionally
attached to the branch :-). It seemed very urgent the other day
(when
the branch was created) that we needed a new patch release ASAP. If
that is not the case then we should drop the branch (easy to do in
SVN) and get started on a 1.1.1 release.
I believe the trunk has Sean and my fixes to the build so we are
good
to go on the branch from the fixed myfaces-all perspective.
TTFN,
-bd
On Sep 26, 2005, at 3:49 PM, Martin Marinschek wrote:
With the documentation in place I don't see it necessary to
immediately pull a release.
So let's take option three and roll it slowly!
regards,
Martin
On 9/26/05, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We seemed to have settled on doing a 1.1.0 patch release. The
one
fix
we know for sure that is going to be in it is the fix to the
TLD and
faces-config.xml regarding the sandbox stuff.
Bill has created a branch for us off the release point. There
are
one
or two "urgent" bugs being described on the user list. Are we
going
to address them in this release or a folow up release?
Here are the options as I see them:
1.) Fix nothing but the faces-config and release
2.) Fix faces config and one or two other show stopers.
3.) Create a new branch off the head, build an RC and put
important
fixes there. Then release after review of RC.
If we choose option #2 or #3 I think we need to do the following:
a.) keep the list *very* of must fixes very small so we don't
have a
SVN merging nightmare
b.) create a JIRA version for 1.1.1 and mark the bugs to be
fixed in
1.1.1 as such.
c.) fix all these bugs on the branch *only*
d.) release 1.1.1
e.) merge back down to trunk and get on with our lives. :-)
This means we also need to be careful about creating and
resolving
bugs. They need to say "nightly" when fixed in the trunk and
"1.1.1"
when fixed in the branch.
Right now I am leaning towards Option #3.
sean
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Trainings in English and German
