No problem, let it as is. It's just easier to keep track of what really was done and part of the release imo. Especially if you have to reroll.
LieGrue, strub >________________________________ > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> >To: openwebbeans-dev <[email protected]>; Mark Struberg ><[email protected]> >Sent: Friday, 8 November 2013, 10:00 >Subject: Re: Time for 1.2.1? > > >oops sorry :s >Romain Manni-Bucau >Twitter: @rmannibucau >Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > > >2013/11/8 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: >> nope, we first do the RESOLVED and not closed. >> >> The reason is that we bulk-change them later to closed once we finally >> shipped the release. >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> >>>________________________________ >>> From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> >>>To: [email protected] >>>Cc: Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >>>Sent: Thursday, 7 November 2013, 21:49 >>>Subject: Re: Time for 1.2.1? >>> >>> >>>Hey guys, >>> >>>Trying to prepare the release. >>>Was cleaning up JIRA >>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20OWB%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC >>> >>> >>>Actually, JIRA are not marked as resolved and the "fix for" attribute is >>>not set. >>>Usually, I'm used to set RESOLVED issues to CLOSED and set the "fix for" >>>field to XXX. >>>Can someone help me to check that list and filter those who are really >>>resolved? >>> >>>Then, I can finish the README from the release notes. >>> >>>Then, creating, publishing and doing the legal stuff is not that long nor >>>hard. >>>Thanks for your help. >>> >>>Jean-Louis >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>2013/11/7 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> >>> >>>> *tested >>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau >>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2013/11/7 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>: >>>> > testes the shadown part just one minute ago and seems not as bad as I >>>> > thought so repassing tcks and I'll commit it >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau >>>> > Twitter: @rmannibucau >>>> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >>>> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >>>> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > 2013/11/7 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]>: >>>> >> If that is a blocking issue, I agree, but why not committing the fix. >>>> >> You have one, even if not perfect, it works in some cases. >>>> >> >>>> >> If definitely not a good patch, who can help fixing that, that was my >>>> main >>>> >> purpose. >>>> >> >>>> >> JLouis >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> 2013/11/7 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >>>> >> >>>> >>> sure, go on. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> LieGrue, >>>> >>> strub >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >________________________________ >>>> >>> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> >>>> >>> >To: [email protected] >>>> >>> >Sent: Wednesday, 6 November 2013, 21:41 >>>> >>> >Subject: Re: Time for 1.2.1? >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> >here are my two sense, cause it does not make sense to always wait >>>> for a >>>> >>> >release or always for a bug to fix. >>>> >>> >We depend on a lot of project, so I would prefer to release more even >>>> if >>>> >>> we >>>> >>> >identified some bugs we cannot fix at a time but at least we are able >>>> to >>>> >>> >release more than once a year. >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> >So, as nobody objected, I will start OWB release. If OWB-912 is not >>>> fully >>>> >>> >fixed, we can push a 1.2.2 soon because we have other things to >>>> fix/do. >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> >For OpenJPA, if the vote is not launched before Friday, we can fork >>>> as we >>>> >>> >did in the past and integrate the final release as soon as it gets >>>> out. >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> >Any thoughts/objections? >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> >JLouis >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> >2013/11/6 David Blevins <[email protected]> >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> >> On the OPENJPA-2335 note. Alex, Tim, Judah and all the 3ds guys >>>> on the >>>> >>> >> users@tomee list are saying they'll have to drop Apache TomEE from >>>> >>> their >>>> >>> >> product unless they get a release. They've been asking since July. >>>> >>> Seems >>>> >>> >> there cutoff is Friday. >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> Looks like the most pragmatic way to make everyone happy is to do >>>> two >>>> >>> >> releases. One now and one again when OPENJPA-2335 is fixed and >>>> OpenJPA >>>> >>> >> 2.3.0 is released. Then there's no need to rush. >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> -David >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> On Nov 5, 2013, at 10:59 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > Well, TomEE is mostly blocked by OPENJPA-2335. This is a >>>> regression >>>> >>> >> which is in there since a few months and blows up many of my old >>>> apps >>>> >>> which >>>> >>> >> run fine with openjpa-2.2.2 and lower. I've committed a test >>>> (currently >>>> >>> >> failing of course) to the 2.3.x branch in openjpa. >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > I'm mostly offline this week due to holding talks on W-JAX. >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > LieGrue, >>>> >>> >> > strub >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> >> ________________________________ >>>> >>> >> >> From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> >>>> >>> >> >> To: [email protected] >>>> >>> >> >> Sent: Wednesday, 6 November 2013, 6:49 >>>> >>> >> >> Subject: Re: Time for 1.2.1? >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> Hey, >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> Still there at least for the moment lol >>>> >>> >> >> Did not get news from Mark on the issue above. We discuss with >>>> Romain >>>> >>> >> but >>>> >>> >> >> we wanted another feedback. If someone else could have a look we >>>> >>> could >>>> >>> >> >> start the release today and have binaries for vote today. >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> Thanks a lot >>>> >>> >> >> Jean Louis >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> Le 6 nov. 2013 06:29, "Romain Manni-Bucau" < >>>> [email protected]> a >>>> >>> >> écrit : >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> We have a regression (found on tomee list). I proposed a patch >>>> but >>>> >>> it >>>> >>> >> needs >>>> >>> >> >>> some review (Mark wanted to have a deeper look if I didnt >>>> >>> >> misunderstand). >>>> >>> >> >>> This is clearly blocking ATM :(. >>>> >>> >> >>> Le 6 nov. 2013 04:39, "David Blevins" <[email protected]> >>>> a >>>> >>> >> écrit : >>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> Jean-Louis fixed the issue and mentioned he would release >>>> today. >>>> >>> But >>>> >>> >> I >>>> >>> >> >>>> also know the "release" of his first baby boy is a few days >>>> overdue >>>> >>> >> :) I >>>> >>> >> >>>> suspect he's suddenly got quite busy. :) >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> If we don't hear from him tomorrow, I'll plan on jumping in for >>>> >>> him to >>>> >>> >> >>> get >>>> >>> >> >>>> the release started. >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> -David >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> On Nov 4, 2013, at 12:36 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO < >>>> >>> [email protected]> >>>> >>> >> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>> Hi, >>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>> Ok lemme at least try this morning. >>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>> Jean-Louis >>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>> 2013/11/4 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> We should fix the session destroy issue first. >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> Should be really easy. >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> Anyone likes to take over? >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> I have 3 conf talks to deliver this week, thus my time is a >>>> bit >>>> >>> >> short >>>> >>> >> >>>> this >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> week... >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> LieGrue, >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> strub >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> Cc: >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, 4 November 2013, 8:24 >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Time for 1.2.1? >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> Lol >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> I've been discussing with Mark for a while. We were waiting >>>> some >>>> >>> >> >>> fixes >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> but >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> I should start the release early this week, maybe today or >>>> so. >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> Le 4 nov. 2013 03:09, "David Blevins" < >>>> [email protected]> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> a écrit : >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> Anyone have any objections if I roll a 1.2.1 release? >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> -David >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>>> -- >>>> >>> >> >>>>> Jean-Louis >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> >-- >>>> >>> >Jean-Louis >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> Jean-Louis >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>-- >>>Jean-Louis >>> >>> > >
