Thanks. So just a reminder of the previously discussed plans: - Cut a
1.0branch tomorrow and make a release candidate not really expecting
it to be
the final one, then another RC on Monday the 17th, and maybe others on the
20th and 23rd if required. General development and changes are kept to a
kelvin goodson wrote:
Luciano,
can you confirm in the JIRA whether the updated fix is good? I'll
keep an eye on this thread to see how your plans develop, and what
that might mean for SDO release plans.
Kelvin.
On 10/09/2007, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have found an
+1 from me. I'd be happy to help wherever required.
- Venkat
On 9/11/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ant has been doing a great job as Release Manager for several releases.
I'd like to nominate him as Release Manager for release 1.0, as it's
going to be a pretty
+1 for Ant.
Simon
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
+1 from me. I'd be happy to help wherever required.
- Venkat
On 9/11/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ant has been doing a great job as Release Manager for several releases.
I'd like to nominate him as Release Manager for
On 9/11/07, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for Ant.
Simon
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
+1 from me. I'd be happy to help wherever required.
- Venkat
On 9/11/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ant has been doing a great job as Release Manager for several
+1, thanks Ant.
On 9/11/07, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/11/07, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for Ant.
Simon
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
+1 from me. I'd be happy to help wherever required.
- Venkat
On 9/11/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL
?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Aug 27, 2007 2:58 AM
Subject: Re: SCA 1.0 release (was Re: Release management for next
release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 8/27/07, ant
Ant has been doing a great job as Release Manager for several releases.
I'd like to nominate him as Release Manager for release 1.0, as it's
going to be a pretty important milestone release for the project, and
I'm sure he'll make it a successful release again!
Thoughts?
[snip]
ant elder
Couldn't say better about Ant as Release Manager, here is my +1
On 9/10/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ant has been doing a great job as Release Manager for several releases.
I'd like to nominate him as Release Manager for release 1.0, as it's
going to be a pretty
+1
On 9/10/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ant has been doing a great job as Release Manager for several releases.
I'd like to nominate him as Release Manager for release 1.0, as it's
going to be a pretty important milestone release for the project, and
I'm sure he'll
: Aug 27, 2007 2:58 AM
Subject: Re: SCA 1.0 release (was Re: Release management for next
release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 8/27/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Aug 27, 2007 2:58 AM
Subject: Re: SCA 1.0 release (was Re: Release management for next
release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 8/27/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/9
(was Re: Release management for next
release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 8/27/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
- Post 0.95, maybe a couple of weeks after the release
Cutting the branch around the 14th to give more time to get the
release into shape sounds good.
We always seems to run into lots of minor sample problems when
we produce an RC and I would expect that we would use some of
the time after cutting the branch to fix these up and polish the
samples.
On the question of differing JIRAs, I think it depends on the JIRA :)
We have to be careful making too many changes in the branch as previously
there's always been regressions due to changes. There's also the question of
who does the work - just raising a JIRA doesn't get the problem fixed and
This sounds pretty close to what I had in mind. But I'm concerned about
cutting the branch before the 14th. IMO the 14th is the earliest
possible date we could cut the branch that would allow us to get enough
done in the trunk to put us in a position to move into this more
controlled mode.
Taking the branch on the 14th and making an RC1 on the 14th is possible,
just the RC is likely to be a little rough as there won't be much time at
all to do checking. But as we're talking about RC1 not expected to be _the_
RC then i guess that could be fine.
...ant
On 8/28/07, Simon Nash
On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
- Post 0.95, maybe a couple of weeks after the release, we'd cut
another branch and head with that for 1.0 release. Being a 1.0
release, we prob. need a branch early as that so that we can whet the
things we are targetting for the
On 8/27/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
- Post 0.95, maybe a couple of weeks after the release, we'd cut
another branch and head with that for 1.0 release. Being a 1.0
release, we prob. need a branch early as that so
ant elder wrote:
On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
- Post 0.95, maybe a couple of weeks after the release, we'd cut
another branch and head with that for 1.0 release. Being a 1.0
release, we prob. need a branch early as that so that we can whet the
things we are
Please review the current distributions so we've a good shot and getting an
RC1 on friday that passes. You can build the absolute latest distro's
yourself from sca/distribution or I'm right now uploading pre-built ones to
http://people.apache.org/~antelder/tuscany/SNAPSHOT/. This isn't complete
Running calculator-script using the distribution, I see the following
message. Result is OK, but this seems to be complaining about some package.
I also saw this when I tried to run the same sample from within eclipse :
sys-package-mgr*: can't create package cache dir, 'C:\tuscany-new\s
On 8/19/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/13/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/13/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Laws wrote:
+1 for 21st as the target. Can I suggest we take some time (assuming
there
is some) on the 20th to
On 8/13/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/13/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Laws wrote:
+1 for 21st as the target. Can I suggest we take some time (assuming
there
is some) on the 20th to test the samples and check through the
readmes etc
before
On 8/13/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Laws wrote:
+1 for 21st as the target. Can I suggest we take some time (assuming
there
is some) on the 20th to test the samples and check through the readmes
etc
before taking the branch.
We could probably get a stable
On 8/9/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess early the following week still leaves time for an August release.
It will be real tight though so we'll all need to be quick and thorough
with
our RC reviews as one problem once we get to the IPMC voting and it could
easily slip it into
Simon Laws wrote:
+1 for 21st as the target. Can I suggest we take some time (assuming there
is some) on the 20th to test the samples and check through the readmes etc
before taking the branch.
We could probably get a stable distribution available on the 20th,
and we would check that.
On
+1 for the 21st.
Simon
ant elder wrote:
I guess early the following week still leaves time for an August release.
It will be real tight though so we'll all need to be quick and thorough with
our RC reviews as one problem once we get to the IPMC voting and it could
easily slip it into
ant elder wrote:
I guess early the following week still leaves time for an August release.
It will be real tight though so we'll all need to be quick and thorough with
our RC reviews as one problem once we get to the IPMC voting and it could
easily slip it into September.
So does taking the
ant elder wrote:
On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
- Post 0.95, maybe a couple of weeks after the release, we'd cut
another branch and head with that for 1.0 release. Being a 1.0
release, we prob. need a branch early as that so that we can whet the
things we are
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Simon Nash wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
[snip]
2) We could branch for the 1.0 release to contain the candidate
modules
and keep doing 1.0 developement in the branch and merge them into the
trunk. I'm not sure how feasible it is.
+1
I
On 8/9/07, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Simon Nash wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
[snip]
2) We could branch for the 1.0 release to contain the candidate
modules
and keep doing 1.0 developement in the branch and merge them into
ant elder wrote:
On 8/9/07, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Simon Nash wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
[snip]
2) We could branch for the 1.0 release to contain the candidate
modules
and keep doing 1.0
On 8/9/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Sure, 1.0 development should happen in trunk, but I was trying to
respond to a different point brought up by Raymond.
On Aug 18, we are going to cut the August release branch. The point is
about allowing small changes, bug fixes
Hi,
Theres been lots of discussion. So let me summarize my understanding
/ imaginiation : -
- We will cut a branch around Aug 18th for Release 0.95. As always,
once the branch is cut we need to be watchful on the commits
(including getting the RMs nod to significant ones) to the branch and
Ant talked about cutting the branch very early next week. I'd prefer
that to doing it on August 18th. I will be away for a few days,
returning home late on the 18th, and I could take advantage of the
extra couple of days to help with last-minute things.
Simon
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
Hi,
I guess early the following week still leaves time for an August release.
It will be real tight though so we'll all need to be quick and thorough with
our RC reviews as one problem once we get to the IPMC voting and it could
easily slip it into September.
So does taking the branch on the 21st
On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
- Post 0.95, maybe a couple of weeks after the release, we'd cut
another branch and head with that for 1.0 release. Being a 1.0
release, we prob. need a branch early as that so that we can whet the
things we are targetting for the
+1 for Ant. He did a great job with 0.90.
Simon
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
+1 for Ant taking doing the RM since his seasoned hand will help up
get things our quickly given the little time we have.
Ant, if you are OK with this count me in for any help you might require in this.
Thanks.
-
+1 for Ant
On 8/8/07, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for Ant. He did a great job with 0.90.
Simon
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
+1 for Ant taking doing the RM since his seasoned hand will help up
get things our quickly given the little time we have.
Ant, if you are OK with this
+1 for the nomination of Ant as the RM.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:10 AM
Subject: Release management for next release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
ant elder wrote
On 8/7/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On 6/30/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With the SCA 0.91 release now being voted on how about starting on 0.92
?
I've already been adding some things I'm interested in getting done to
the
next
Comments inline.
- Original Message -
From: ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: Release management for next release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
On 8/7/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ant
AM
Subject: Re: Release management for next release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
On 8/7/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On 6/30/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With the SCA 0.91 release now being voted on how about starting on
0.92
?
I've already
after that.
Simon
Raymond Feng wrote:
Comments inline.
- Original Message - From: ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: Release management for next release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
On 8/7/07
Some thoughts inline.
ant elder wrote:
We've started talking about an 0.92 release way back on June 30th saying it
would be in August. To make this happen takes a minimum of two 3 day votes,
past releases show we always need at least 2 release candidates, so to
ensure we get a release out in
Comment inline.
Simon
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Some thoughts inline.
ant elder wrote:
We've started talking about an 0.92 release way back on June 30th
saying it
would be in August. To make this happen takes a minimum of two 3 day
votes,
past releases show we always need at least 2
[snip]
Simon Nash wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
[snip]
2) We could branch for the 1.0 release to contain the candidate
modules
and keep doing 1.0 developement in the branch and merge them into the
trunk. I'm not sure how feasible it is.
+1
I think it's feasible if doing 1.0
ant elder wrote:
On 6/30/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With the SCA 0.91 release now being voted on how about starting on 0.92?
I've already been adding some things I'm interested in getting done to the
next release wiki page -
49 matches
Mail list logo
