Any particular reason these changes don’t just go into 2.0? I think that smaller, more frequent releases pose less risk to deploy. Aside from that are there other reasons to keep code “in your pocket” until the release branch is cut?
—Eric > On Feb 20, 2017, at 6:08 PM, Dave Neuman <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'll take a look at open PRs tomorrow and see if there is anything I want > to make sure gets in. Other than that I am +1 > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 16:06 Mark Torluemke <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Agree -- I think sooner-is-better for branching 2.0. >> >> Cheers, >> Mark >> >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Jan van Doorn <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> +100 ! >>> >>> I really want to get some changes in to 2.1. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> JvD >>> >>>> On Feb 20, 2017, at 1:42 PM, Eric Friedrich <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey All- >>>> Its about time to cut our first branch in the 2.0 series and starting >>>> testing release candidates. >>>> >>>> TC1.8 is not quite yet through the incubator voting process, but it >>> appears >>>> that approval is hopefully quite close. No changes have gone into 1.8 >> in >>>> the past few months, so on top of the move to Postgres we have quite >> the >>>> set of changes in this upcoming release. >>>> >>>> >>>> Unless I hear strong opinions otherwise in the next 2-3 days, I'll cut >>> the >>>> TC2.0 release branch later this week and bump the master version >> numbers >>> up >>>> to 2.1 >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Eric >>>> Release Manager-elect >>> >>> >>
