Simon Laws wrote:
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:Ram has definitely being doing most if not all the RM work for this release, so +1 for Ram as Release Manager for 1.4 On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 5:10 AM, Ramkumar R <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > I am happy take up the responsibility as a release manager for 1.4, also > happy to help Luciano if he likes to take up the responsibility and take > this forward. > > On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 6:28 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 12:20 PM, Ramkumar R <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >>> >>> I have been constantly working on the 1.x branch and noticed that changes >>> have been going into 1.x branch apart from the JIRA's that I raised for >>> clean-up. >>> >>> Agree with Simon, if we don't need 1.4 branch then the work on 1.x need >>> to stop at some point of time for the release to happen. >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 9:02 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Looks like the 1.4 branch was already created [1], so I'm just trying >>>>>>> to avoid having to use it and continue working on 1.x branch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/branches/sca-java-1.4/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> > +1 to use 1.x branch for 1.x releases. I don't see a need to create >>>>>>> > 1.4 >>>>>>> > branch. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Thanks, >>>>>>> > Raymond >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > -------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> > From: "Luciano Resende" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 11:19 AM >>>>>>> > To: <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>>>> > Subject: 1.x branch versus 1.4 branch >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >> I think we have successfully used the 1.x branch to stabilize the >>>>>>> >> code >>>>>>> >> and prepare for the 1.4 release. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Are we seeing any changes in the 1.x branch that might cause it to >>>>>>> >> become unstable that would justify having a 1.4 branch ? Or is >>>>>>> >> there >>>>>>> >> any changes that will go to 1.4 branch that should not go to trunk >>>>>>> >> ? I >>>>>>> >> know we have been creating release branches in the past, but the >>>>>>> >> trunk >>>>>>> >> used to be a very active development stream and usually with >>>>>>> >> disruptive changes, but now that we have the 1.x branch as a more >>>>>>> >> stable branch, do you guys think that we could try cutting the 1.4 >>>>>>> >> release direct from the 1.x branch, and avoid merges back and >>>>>>> >> forth >>>>>>> >> from these branches, and I believe it would make the release >>>>>>> >> process >>>>>>> >> simpler ? >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Thoughts ? >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>> >> Luciano Resende >>>>>>> >> Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk >>>>>>> >> http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> >>>>>>> >> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Luciano Resende >>>>>>> Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk >>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> >>>>>>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >>>>>> >>>>>> I think this would work if we stop changes on 1.x, concentrate on >>>>>> getting the release out before resuming changes on 1.x. Everyone willing to >>>>>> get involved in getting the release out quickly? >>>>>> >>>>>> Simon >>>>> >>>>> I think we need to keep both the 1.4 and 1.x branches for now sorry. >>>>> One reason is we've quite a lot of work happening with the Tuscany Geronimo >>>>> integration right now and we will need to do changes in the Tuscany code to >>>>> support that. This is based on 1.x and it will be some time before 2.0 is >>>>> ready enough to move to that. I think its also quite likely we'll need a >>>>> 1.4.1 especially since its been so long since we've done a 1.x trunk release >>>>> so need a stable place for that to happen while still allowing other 1.x >>>>> changes to continue. >>>>> >>>>> I don't think this will be onerous, its not much work merging changes >>>>> from 1.4 to 1.x, if anyone does find it too hard just say and i'll help, and >>>>> we can revisit if we need to keep this once the Geronimo and 2.0 work are >>>>> more complete. >>>>> >>>>> ...ant >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> hmm, I actually don't don't have a particularly strong opinion one way >>>> or the other. If you think that 1.4.1 is a possiblity then we should stick >>>> with the release branch. b.t.w who's release manager on this. >>>> >>>> Simon >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks & Regards, >>> Ramkumar Ramalingam >> >> Ram are you going to be the release manger for 1.4. Looking back through >> the various threads I see that Luciano offered at one stage. You have been >> doing most of the work to date. Did you two reach some agreement on who was >> taking the helm? >> >> Simon > > > > -- > Thanks & Regards, > Ramkumar Ramalingam > -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ Yep, +1 for Ram as RM. He's been doing a sterling job so far. Simon
> +1 from me. Ram has been doing a great job on this. Simon
