Hi, On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Alex Parvulescu <[email protected]> wrote: > The simplest way is to also include OAK-82 (this morning's commit) so we > have a clean trunk for 0.2.1.
Sounds good. > What should the release notes say about the licencing issue? Something like "The earlier 0.2 release candidate was rejected because of a minor licensing issue that is now resolved." should be fine. Or just not mention it at all. It's only relevant as an explanation of why we're releasing 0.2.1 instead of 0.2 after the 0.1 release. > ah, forgot. I also have to rollback the version from 0.3-SNAPSHOT to > 0.2.1-SNAPSHOT that also includes the changes. The Maven release plugin allows you to set the release version to 0.2.1 even when you start from 0.3-SNAPSHOT. Just tell it to reset the snapshot version back to 0.3-SNAPSHOT after cutting the release. BR, Jukka Zitting
