>> In particular, can someone confirm that last release date? > AFAICS 0.11.0 is a renamed 0.10.1 and each fix and commit afterwards > got contributed under that version number from 2008-07-01 until today.... > > I currently don't understand when commits on trunk count as official > releases...
I don't think 0.10.1 ever officially made it out the door (based on http://archive.apache.org/dist/logging/log4cxx/). 0.10.0 may have been the last "blessed" release as far as ASF is concerned (on 2008-04-03 per http://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/changes-report.html). I'll list 0.10.0 on 2008-04-03 for the podling report with an asterisk and some small explanation. I'll do this. Please shout if you hate the idea. > We add back 0.10.1 as a > official release and tag, everything afterwards until, but not > including Christian's committed patches from the list and JIRA counts > as 0.11.0 and the patches from Christian until today are 0.11.1 and > count as the last official release of the project before incubating. I like it but I'd skip "0.10.1" and just call it 0.11.0. In the wild there are many 0.10.x-patchlevel things running about (e.g. http://packages.debian.org/sid/liblog4cxx10) and unambiguously being a new revision number might help getting this noticed and into the distros a touch sooner. I also like patches applied by Christian being a soon-to-follow 0.11.1. > In my opinion we should afterwards branch the trunk as some new 0.12.0 > and incorporate all changes for our first release in there. We then get > our first clean release by merging the 0.12.0 branch back to trunk. I like it. > This should be the first release back in the incubator. To be careful on Incubation policy, I'd call the 0.11.0 and 0.11.1 incubation releases as well and be sure we follow the proper steps. There's some nontrivial overhead in calling something a "release" now that we're under incubation (http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases). > In this case we would always have a trunk as the last official > release, work in branches and maybe only commit directly to trunk what > needs to be changed on the website itself. Else I currently don't > understand how one can see if work in progress on the trunk is an > official release or not. Agreed. Have a preference for the branch name for the development line? No logging convention jumps out at my from looking at, e.g., https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/log4j/log4j2/branches/. Once https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-7092 closes, should we start with getting that 0.11.0 release branch made from src on carnold's last commit? If so, anyone want to take lead there when the time comes? - Rhys
