Forget the release number for a minute and just consider this: Do we want to release without the 'radical' ;-) new stuff (flow APIs, low/no-GC) ASAP because we have a lot of changes already. Or, are we more comfortable with a fatter release later, with more changes, which may feel less stable and more disruptive depending on your POV and taste for change.
This is all mod Ralph's availability as RM unless someone else wants to pick up the task. Gary On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > That does sound like a 2.5.1 release. I'd be fine with a 2.5.1 release. If > it's already changed enough to warrant 2.6 semantically, we might as well > finish our other 2.6 work first. > > On 21 February 2016 at 02:11, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Depending on whether we can get consensus on a Logger API without >> varargs, I estimate I am about a week away from finishing the code changes >> for the GC-free epic. I would then want to do performance tests and do a >> write-up, which is another week or two. >> >> I would prefer including this work in the 2.6 release, but if the >> consensus is to do a release soon without the GC-free epic I won't object. >> -Remko >> >> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Without the flow logging API changes and gc-free stuff it would just be >>> a 2.5.1 release, no? >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> FWIW: From a practical POV, one way to do this would be to branch >>>> master into a 2.6 branch and prune the branch of the new stuff. >>>> >>>> Gary >>>> >>>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi All: >>>>> >>>>> Since we have a nice stack of changes already, I would like for us to >>>>> consider the following: >>>>> >>>>> Release 2.6 without the new flow tracing APIs and without the new >>>>> low/no-GC code (ByteBufferDestination and all). >>>>> >>>>> Then we can make the next release have two themes: flow tracing and >>>>> no/low GC. >>>>> >>>>> This would avoid too big a 2.6 release in relation to 2.5. >>>>> >>>>> Thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> Gary >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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
