Hah, I didn't even think of that when I read through it but it makes
sense as well. I have a conference coming next week but after that I'll
make sure that trunk and the 2.0 branch are in sync and plan on the next
uPortal release using that and continuing with that path until the
larger changes
LOL, I now see my previous anwer gave the wrong suggestion :)
To be clear, I'm fine with doing the 2.0.3 release *myself*, but what I intended
to say below was that, if the differences between 2.1.0 trunk and 2.0.3 branch
are so minimal, *you* could just as well release and use the 2.0.3 (with
Sounds good. I'll leave the 2.0 and 2.1 branches as they are for now
other than making sure any relevant patches have been applied to both. I
agree the two open issues can be punted though I'll take a peak at the
ant task bundling issue and see if that isn't something that can be
tackled with a
On 05/17/2011 05:07 PM, Eric Dalquist wrote:
Not in the next two months or so, just don't have time. I still have some re-org
changes I'd like to work on but if we want to scrap the 2.1 versioning for now
and stick trunk back to 2.0 so we have less to maintain I'm fine with that.
I'd just as we
Not in the next two months or so, just don't have time. I still have
some re-org changes I'd like to work on but if we want to scrap the 2.1
versioning for now and stick trunk back to 2.0 so we have less to
maintain I'm fine with that.
-Eric
On 05/17/2011 09:49 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
On 05/17/
On 05/17/2011 04:28 PM, Eric Dalquist wrote:
In preparation for an RC of uPortal I'd like to get a M2 release of Pluto 2.1.0
cut. If there are no objections I'll start the process of staging the M2
artifacts this evening and then post a vote.
No objections from me.
We'll soon will need a releas
