Gary mentioned that in Commons they have multiple versions on the site so he suggested using that profile/maven plugin. That said, this may not be easy and will probably be significant work.
As Gary said, we're all in agreement we can do a 2.1 release, so there's no need to look into the implications of the beta idea further. Are there any items we still want to include in this release? Sent from my iPhone > On 2014/09/23, at 8:25, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > > Matt, > > It seems like the consensus is to skip a beta. > > You may want to send a [poll] email and get a more formal feel for it. > > Gary > >> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: >> How would I even be able to release the beta artifacts? The "release" >> profile doesn't seem appropriate. >> >>> On 22 September 2014 12:15, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I'm also fine with just doing a 2.1 and following up with 2.1.x releases if >>> issues are found. >>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 2:01 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Unless we have some way to have more than one release on the site, making >>>> it 2.1 might be our best bet. >>>> >>>>> On 22 September 2014 11:01, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Do we need to have a 2.1-beta release, or shall we just do a 2.1 release >>>>> (and follow up with 2.1.1 etc if issues are found)? >>>>> >>>>> When are we aiming to do this release? >>>>> >>>>> There are still ~10 open Jira tickets targetting 2.1. >>>>> Please take a look to see if that list is up to date. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > > > -- > E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition > JUnit in Action, Second Edition > Spring Batch in Action > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
