+1 to release. Thank you for volunteering :) We've got a number of good bug fixes pending...
But: I think we should simply name it 3.0.1? If we skip 3.0.1 I think it will cause confusion? We can state in the CHANGES that 2.9.2 has same bug fixes as 3.0.1 and vice/versa? Mike On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > Hallo all, > > I think it is ready to start the release process of 3.0.(1|2) and 2.9.2 soon. > Before building the artifacts I would compare the changelogs and try to merge > them to get a similar bugfix level for both versions. I would like to release > both versions on the same day with the same release message. I have all > scripts available here and can start the builds easily on my solaris box. > > Maybe we should name the next 3.0 release 3.0.2 (and not use .1?) - so it > says 2.9.2 and 3.0.2 are equal from the bugfix level? > > Hopefully these will be the last releases from these branches and we can > release 3.1 after flex is in. > > Uwe > > P.S.: Robert: And I will explicitly try out the demo application :-) > ----- > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
