On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 7:45 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> How are the plans for the next trunk 2.x release going ? I see we are >>> making progress, but it does not seem are closing down on it ? With >>> ApacheCon approaching quickly, I was wondering if we could do a >>> release by end of month, and if people are not comfortable doing a >>> release without all the tide ups going into samples, compliance tests, >>> etc, maybe we could just call it M6 instead of BETA ? >>> >>> Thoughts ? >>> >> >> To be honest I don't think we're likely to get the beta release done >> by this month. Realistically we'd have to expect probably at least >> three RCs if its "Beta1" to get it to a state where everyone is happy >> which would take at least a one week and that only leaves about a week >> to get everything done, looking at the state of things right now i'd >> guess thats not quite enough. Calling it M6 might help, another thing >> could be to separate the samples etc just do a src and runtime jars >> release for now. >> >> As a side comment large amounts of time over the last weeks haven't >> actually been directly on release work but just on fixing up the build >> that had been left to get ragged. I got a clean build through locally >> yesterday for the first time in ages but i don't think we've had a >> clean Hudson one yet still. Without a working clean build its been >> hard to do the release work as you can't tell if you're breaking >> something. >> >> ...ant >> > > I don't mind if it's called M6 instead of beta > I think releasing parts of the code base will just add confusion when > I feel we're making good progress toward a more consistent approach > Experience tells me we need to roll an RC ASAP, log the issues and get > to fixing them otherwise we will enter a twilight zone where no one > really knows what's happening. It has actually seemed like we are > there already but, as Ants says, in reality we've just been working > hard to stabalize the build. > > So who would like to be RM this time round? If there are no other > takes I'll volunteer. >
As a slight aside, there has been some discussion and comments with the ASF about if there is a need for an official RM term these days, I don't think there is. Its usually a team effort and everyone helping should be considered equal so avoiding labeling a particular person RM helps encourage everyone to participate. Lets just do it, if we have several of us making a concerted effort it is still possible that we can get something good out this month. ...ant
