+1 for get something out asap to call M1; which to me means no Maven in M1.
Marnie is right, plus people all over the world are looking to grab some
Qpid goodness right now, but they don't know what to grab :-)
+1 that M2 should have the Maven based build system (we all agree it is good
stuff).
I think Carl's suggestion is a good one, since I would hope bug fix traffic
on an M1 label would be modest, which allows for the necessary carnage to
take place on the trunk to Mavenise Qpid.
We just need to make it very clear where M1 patches post release are going;
there is scope for confusion.
John
On 14/11/06, Carl Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I fully understand, that is why I was trying to get consensus. The issue
is that when M1 punch list was build maven
was not included. This might have been because Steve was on the road --
the fact is that no one else added it for M1
Anyway we have a situation where we completed all the JIRAs for M1 and
as committers where trying to close down for RC
when the maven for M1 discussion started. unfortunate...
I understand the desire to get maven in, in M1. I also understand the
desire to branch the mainline and move on. Somewhere
someone has to give some goodwill --- worst case is that those that want
maven in force a 3 day window for vote, --- then as those
that want to keep moving still might not vote maven in for M1.
Let's not use up all the good will and be pragmatic..
To this end my a propose a third option:
- branch to release what we have now (This is a good so that we can
work through all the apache release procedures)
- when we release C++ and other components in a few weeks time (maybe
push back to Dec) we call it M2 and re-cut an update of Java
- with maven + new code generators, persistence etc....
Does this fly ?? if not suggest a variation.
Carl.
Daniel Kulp wrote:
> Carl,
>
>
>> I see we have two options:
>> 1.) extend the time line
>> 2.) Cut the release as using ant as in the vote thread (the key was to
>> let Steve get the test refactor to main-line)
>>
> ....
>
>> I would like to get a show of hands on this point, and if I am correct
>> in my assessment we should create the M1 branch with ant create the RC
>> and give the team time to get up to speed with maven on mainline for M2
>> and continue M2 development. Rajith can then create the branch and a
>> signed RC later today that we can all test.
>>
>
> I just want to point out that if a concensus isn't reached and a vote
> needs to be called, that will delay M1 for at least another 3 days as
the
> vote MUST be run for 72 hours. In those 3 days, most of the maven
> issues could be fixed.
>
>
>
>> Please can you show your level of comfort including maven (release
>> maven branch) or ant build for M1 (1 line answers so that we can
>> easily see where the committers are at)
>>
>
> I'm -1 (non-binding) to releasing with Ant as that would mean other
> projects would not be able to take dependencies on it. (unless someone
> spends some time getting the ant build to generate maven artifacts,
which
> would be a stupid waste of time) Since I'm a commiter on at least two
> such projects, I say spend the time getting maven working.
>
>
>
