Hi, +1 for a short lifecycle. I'm not totally for what I'll ask but it's an alternative solution: What about continuous deployement? A Jenkins build pipeline that will trigger Jira ticket resolution then releasing Karaf if all tests pass? I really don't know if it's a viable solution, but it would make the thing :).
Best regards, 2014-10-08 10:46 GMT+02:00 Jamie G. <[email protected]>: > +1 > > There will always be another upstream fix to wait for, a short Karaf > update cycle seems to be the best approach to avoiding extended > delays. > > --J > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 4:55 AM, Achim Nierbeck <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm in big favor of having a hard release cycle on 6 weeks (minimum I'd > > actually prefer 4 ;) ) > > Regarding the thoughts about 3party dependencies, actually it's the > reason > > we don't get our own bugfixes out fast right now. > > Actually I'd say screw it. No more waiting for 3rd party dependencies ... > > get the stuff out fast cause 4-6 weeks later you have the next > > release picking up the issue. > > > > regards, Achim > > > > > > 2014-10-08 8:18 GMT+02:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>: > >> > >> That's why we have an extend of 2 weeks to deal with other projects. > >> > >> Regards > >> JB > >> > >> On 10/08/2014 08:16 AM, Christian Schneider wrote: > >>> > >>> Generally I agree that we should aim for such a cycle. > >>> I only hope it is possible as we depend a lot on other projects that we > >>> bundle. So a lot of the time a release waits on fixes or releases in > >>> upstream projects. > >>> > >>> Christian > >>> > >>> Am 08.10.2014 07:52, schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofré: > >>>> > >>>> Hi all, > >>>> > >>>> Users complained about the variable and long delays between Karaf > >>>> releases. It's a fair comment and it's something that we have to > >>>> improve. > >>>> > >>>> I propose the following new policy about the releases cycle: > >>>> - for "active" branches (3.0.x and 2.4.x), I propose a release every 6 > >>>> weeks, with maximum extend to 8 weeks. > >>>> - for "eol" and "maintenance" branches (2.2.x and 2.3.x), it's "on > >>>> demand", no strong cycle there. > >>>> > >>>> WDYT ? > >>>> > >>>> If everybody agrees, I will update the releases schedule page on the > >>>> website. > >>>> > >>>> Regards > >>>> JB > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >> [email protected] > >> http://blog.nanthrax.net > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Apache Member > > Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC > > OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer > & > > Project Lead > > blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> > > > > Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master > > > -- Charlie Mordant Full OSGI/EE stack made with Karaf: https://github.com/OsgiliathEnterprise/net.osgiliath.parent
