On 01/04/2011 10:11, Paul Sharples wrote:
On 01/04/2011 09:11, Scott Wilson wrote:
On 31 Mar 2011, at 22:21, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 31/03/2011 10:54, Paul Sharples wrote:
On 14/03/2011 11:48, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 14/03/2011 09:29, Scott Wilson wrote:
...
I've done some work on this (finally). I've moved all the docs into
our growing CMS based site (but not committed yet as SVN is down
right now).
I've done some testing, but only of the source release since a
problem emerged on the Apache servers after I got that zip.
The first thing that strikes me is that since these candidates were
built such a long time ago and since we have done some good work in
Wookie since then, should we just build some new release candidates?
I'm tempted to say no, lets just get this out of the door. Bypass
the Ant 1.8 issue by not officially releasing the source versions
and following up fairly quickly with 0.9.1?
Getting two releases out the door quickly will not only look good
from a community perspective but will also allow us to fine tune the
release process.
However, if you would prefer to just get one release out then we can
build new release candidates now and have the fixes between this
release candidate and now included in 0.9
Thoughts?
My preference is to release 0.9.0 now and move quickly to 0.9.1.
For 0.9.0 I think we have two options:
1. Release as-is, with a release note regarding the Ant 1.8 issue
2. Fix the Ant issue in the 0.9.0 branch first and recreate the packages
I'm fine with either.
I say we release as is 0.9.0 (all three builds - src, standalone &
war), and include any info in the notes. I think we should then be
looking to get another one out very soon.
Just to expand on that I mean I would rebuild the 0.9.0 branch to
recreate the builds with the added KEYS file (containing the commiters
public keys) and new updated NOTES file (containing the few issues we
found in WOOKIE-181), then sign the binaries. Additionally the ant
build-release tasks also make tar archives which are not currently on my
people.apache.org space. (if you want to double check these then use the
ant build-release task in the 0.9.0 branch to build them yourself).
Nothing has changed in the branch since i built them last time, so they
should in theory be exactly the same.
Is there anything I've missed?
Ross
