I updated a couple in that list that I assigned to myself. There's an issue by Gary that looks to be fixed already that he can probably close.
On 24 September 2014 11:45, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > For my money, move them all to 2.2. > > Gary > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Are there any issues in the list of open 2.1 items >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20LOG4J2%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20due%20ASC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC> >> we would want to address for 2.1? >> >> Or should these all be moved to 2.2? >> >> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:14 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> That's why I thought calling it a "candidate" release made that >>> distinction. Plus, Alpha, Beta, Candidate release. Going ABC like that >>> makes suffixes like Final or Release both come next, though that's not an >>> issue here. >>> >>> On 23 September 2014 16:30, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> When you do a release that release has to be voted on - which makes it >>>> a release “candidate”. If it is not approved than the candidate fails, you >>>> fix whatever problems there were and move on to the next candidate. In >>>> short, it is something that is just part of the release process for a >>>> specific release. It doesn’t really belong in the artifact id and/or >>>> version. It may need to be represented in the source repository, but that >>>> is difficult to do with Maven. >>>> >>>> The notion of Alpha or Beta denotes the expected stability of the >>>> release. >>>> >>>> Ralph >>>> >>>> On Sep 23, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Confusing! What's wrong with Alpha, Beta and Release? A release >>>> candidate is our internal bits before it gets to A, B, or R. >>>> >>>> Gary >>>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Maybe we can call the "release candidate" a "candidate release", while >>>>> the traditional RC is still an RC. So in this case, we do CRs for the >>>>> official release (which I believe was how you suggested naming tags). >>>>> >>>>> On 23 September 2014 11:40, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> A beta release is exactly the same as a “regular” release. Just >>>>>> change the version in the pom to 2.1-beta1. >>>>>> >>>>>> As for getting multiple versions on the site, other projects do that. >>>>>> Maven does it for older versions. It should just be a matter of copying >>>>>> the template they use. >>>>>> >>>>>> IMO the only reason to do a beta is if their are new features that we >>>>>> consider to be not-quite-ready for production. On the other hand, I >>>>>> consider an RC to be believed to be production ready but requiring >>>>>> additional feedback. FWIW - I find RCs a bit confusing since we vote on >>>>>> a >>>>>> “release candidate” with every release. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ralph >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sep 23, 2014, at 8:43 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps we can all take time until this weekend to clean up and >>>>>> polish before you cut an RC... on Friday? >>>>>> >>>>>> Gary >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I know that the work I was doing on log4j-web can wait for 2.2, so >>>>>>> no objections for going ahead with 2.1 from me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 22 September 2014 19:25, Remko Popma <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] >>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] >>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >>> >> >> > > > -- > E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition > <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
