Hi Dennis: I think the suggestion was that we do a release branched off the 2.2.0 release with a bare set of patches moved over - primarily the Logging fix and I think there was a change to one of the JRMP context classes that I needed for the Surrogate container. And then a release from the qa_refactor branch a little bit later.
Personally I'd like to see some kind of release sooner rather than later. It's been a while. I'll act as RM for a minimal release if we can agree on doing that. I'm planning on having a few cycles this afternoon to take a look at a diff and see what-all changed, and if there was anything else that should go into a minimal release. Cheers, Greg. On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 09:39, Dennis Reedy wrote: > On Apr 2, 2013, at 750AM, Peter Firmstone wrote: > > > On 2/04/2013 7:51 PM, Dennis Reedy wrote: > >> On Apr 2, 2013, at 338AM, Peter Firmstone wrote: > >> > >>> The formatting didn't work out, I'll create a Jira issue to discuss. > >>> > >>> Patricia's done a great job detailing the dependencies and issues with > >>> TaskManager's Task implementations. > >>> > >>> I recall a list discussion from the original Sun developers who had > >>> intended to replace TaskManager, the runAfter method has issues. > >>> > >>> Being so prevalent, it's quite possible that TaskManager is causing > >>> issues and it might also explain why as performance improves more issues > >>> arise. > >>> > >>> If a task completes before another task which it's supposed to runAfter > >>> but isn't present in the queue; that could explain some issues. > >>> > >>> I much prefer idempotent code myself. > >>> > >>> This could take some effort to fix, any volunteers? > >>> > >>> Dennis are you able to continue with your 2.2.1 branch release? > >> At this point I am unsure what branch to base the 2.2.1 release off of. > > > > The 2.2.0 release, it might benefit from backports of synchronization fixes > > that improve correctness, but not performance, if some volunteers can diff > > the qa-refactoring branch and the 2.2.0 branch, there are numerous simple > > synchronization fixes. > > I'd like to suggest we release from qa-trunk. With all the work thats been > going on here, I dont see back porting it to the 2.2 branch is meaningful. > The delta is just too much. >
