that's perfectly fine. Thus I will start creating the branch in +4h if no one objects?
What should the branch name be? "2.2.x" is d'accord with your naming conventions? txs and LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: Albert Lee <[email protected]> > To: [email protected]; Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > Cc: > Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 6:04 PM > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0? > > Mark, > > Will it be fair to assume the following: > - Since your interest is to get 2.2.0 release out asap, you will be start > doing the 2.2.0 release work sometime this week. > - Once the release is complete we will assume the ownership of this > release, for service maintenance. > > Thanks, > Albert Lee. > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Albert! >> I have no special interrest in maintaining this branch longer as needed. >> I'm just a user like anyone else. >> >> The main reason for pushing this release is that the last OpenJPA release >> was pretty long time ago and trunk already contains quite a few important >> improvements. >> >> In OpenWebBeans and MyFaces we usually only create a new maintenance >> branch if there were big new features to be incorporated in trunk. If we >> know that we like to do a new heavyweight feature, then we create a branch >> for 2.2.x and do the maintenance there. Otherwise we release from trunk >> because we don't like to do all the merging stuff if not really needed. >> >> But I'm fine with whatever branching behaviour the OpenJPA community is >> used to (just need to know it). >> >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: Albert Lee <[email protected]> >> > To: [email protected] >> > Cc: >> > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2012 6:41 PM >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0? >> > >> > Mark, >> > >> > You are advocating a 2.2.x maintenance release. Per Kevin's note > on >> service >> > branch management, do you have a need to "own" that release > for your >> > product servicing need? >> > >> > We have the same service requirement based on trunk right now. If you >> need >> > owning the 2.2.1 service branch, we can create a separate 2.2.2 after >> 2.2.1 >> > is completed. Otherwise we can be the release owner of the 2.2.1 > branch. >> > >> > Albert Lee. >> > >> > On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Kevin Sutter > <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Mark, >> >> You're on the right track. You can browse the OpenJPA svn > repository >> > to >> >> see how we've done it in the past. For example, each of our > major >> > releases >> >> is always tagged: >> >> >> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/tags >> >> >> >> And, corresponding to most of these releases is a service branch: >> >> >> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches >> >> >> >> Mainline development continues on trunk. So, once we cut the > 2.2.0 >> >> release, then trunk becomes 2.3.0-SNAPSHOT. That is, trunk is > working >> >> towards the next 2.3.0 release. >> >> >> >> Each of the service branches has an owning manager. That manager >> normally >> >> creates and maintains that service branch. Nothing goes into > that >> service >> >> branch without the owning manager's signoff. >> >> >> >> This approach allows multiple organizations to own their service >> branches, >> >> if desired. So, after the 2.2.0 release is complete, we normally >> create >> >> the 2.2.x service branch. But, if there is a reason for you to >> maintain a >> >> 2.2.0-mt service branch, there is nothing stopping you. It's > quite >> >> flexible. >> >> >> >> At some point, there may be a determination to also create a > service >> >> release off the branch. For example, you'll notice that we > have >> > created a >> >> 2.1.1 release based off the 2.1.x service branch. >> >> >> >> Make sense? This is the approach we have used for several > releases and >> >> it's been working for the OpenJPA development team. >> >> >> >> Here are a few links that help describe our process: >> >> http://openjpa.apache.org/release-management.html >> >> http://openjpa.apache.org/openjpa-release-policy.html >> >> >> >> Kevin >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Mark Struberg > <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> > To not let this slip. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > What are the release plans in general? Do you like to start > with the >> > work >> >> > on the new JPA spec soon (guess this might take another year > to get >> >> > finished). I'd rather keep the trunk as main development > stage and >> > would >> >> > like to work towards a 2.2.1 afterwards on trunk. >> >> > >> >> > The reason why I ask this is for the branch we like to > create. >> > It's a >> >> > difference if we just create a '2.2.0-mt' branch (mt > for >> > maintenance) >> >> only >> >> > for getting 2.2.0 out of the door, and continue our main > development >> >> effort >> >> > on trunk. Or if we create a '2.2.x' branch and do > the most >> > work there >> >> (and >> >> > need to merge all work over to trunk). >> >> > >> >> > I'm +1 for 2.2.0-mt >> >> > >> >> > If noone objects then I like to start this new branch middle > of next >> >> week. >> >> > What work needs to be done until then? My gut feeling says: >> >> > >> >> > * review open JIRAs >> >> > * verify and resolve the ones already fixed >> >> > * update the fix-version to 2.2.1 for the others >> >> > * run the TCK >> >> > * verify/update the documentation of new features. >> >> > >> >> > This reminds me that our pdf doesn't contain good > information for >> > the new >> >> > openjpa-maven-plugin. I was also not able to find where we > deploy the >> >> > plugin documentation to. This is imo something we should > review/fix >> >> before >> >> > we branch. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > feel free to add missing tasks. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > LieGrue, >> >> > strub >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> > > From: Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >> >> > > To: "[email protected]" >> > <[email protected]> >> >> > > Cc: >> >> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 8:11 PM >> >> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0? >> >> > > >> >> > > I'd just branch the trunk and remove JEST later. Or > just keep >> > it and >> >> > mark it >> >> > > as 'experimental' - doesn't hurt! >> >> > > >> >> > > LieGrue, >> >> > > strub >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> > >> From: Kevin Sutter <[email protected]> >> >> > >> To: [email protected]; Donald Woods >> > <[email protected]> >> >> > >> Cc: >> >> > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 7:41 PM >> >> > >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0? >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Donald, >> >> > >> >> >> > >>> I would suggest someone verifying a clean TCK > run >> > before we branch. >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Excellent idea. We used to have someone from the > Apache >> > community do >> >> > this >> >> > >> for us since not everybody has access to the TCK. > Is there >> > someone >> >> > that >> >> > >> can step up to do this? >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> Also, are there any samples or experimental > code that >> > needs to be >> >> > > removed >> >> > >>> or cleaned up before we create a 2.2.0 > release? >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Since you brought this up... I'm think we > need to >> > re-think the JEST >> >> > > module >> >> > >> that is currently in trunk. Pinaki originally put > it into >> > trunk with >> >> > the >> >> > >> hopes of solidifying it before we do another > release. I >> > don't think >> >> > > that >> >> > >> effort has transpired. Since it's a separate > module, >> > maybe it can be >> >> > >> pulled before creating the 2.2.0 release and 2.2.x > service >> > stream and >> >> > then >> >> > >> put back into trunk? Other ideas? >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Kevin >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> -Donald >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> ________________________________ >> >> > >>> From: Mark Struberg > <[email protected]> >> >> > >>> To: openjpa-dev > <[email protected]> >> >> > >>> Cc: David Blevins > <[email protected]> >> >> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 12:11 PM >> >> > >>> Subject: [DISCUSS] release openjpa-2.2.0? >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> Hi folks! >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> I've now used openjpa-2.2.0 excessively > and it >> > looks very good to >> >> > > me. >> >> > >>> What do you think about going forward and > shipping a >> > 2.2.0? >> >> > >>> Or at least a RC1... >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> OpenEJB and Geronimo are waiting for an > openjpa-2.2.x >> > release as >> >> well >> >> > > ;) >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> LieGrue, >> >> > >>> strub >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Albert Lee. >> > >> > > > > -- > Albert Lee. >
