Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [el-dev] House-keeping and #188

On 21/06/2022 00:34, arjan tijms wrote:
Hi,

Thanks Mark for driving this. Sorry that I couldn't provide feedback as I'm swamped with work trying to get EE 10 done. I was fine with both options though, and B seems particularly fine.

No worries. Thanks for the email. It is reassuring that there is another pair of eyes on things.

Mark



Kind regards,
Arjan Tijms


On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 9:58 PM Mark Thomas <markt@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:markt@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    On 20/06/2022 16:31, Mark Thomas wrote:
     > On 06/06/2022 13:06, Mark Thomas wrote:
     >> Hi all,
     >>
     >> Some of you may have noticed issue #188. I think we are going to
    need
     >> to fix this for at least the next release (probably 6.0 since
    there is
     >> deprecated code we want to remove) and the recently released 5.0.0.
     >>
     >> The version in the master branch has already been prepared for
    the 6.0
     >> development. Shortly, I plan to do the following:
     >>
     >> - Rename the 5.0.0 branch (created at the same point 5.0.0 was
    tagged)
     >>    to 5.0.x and ensure that it is prepared for 5.0.1 development
     >>    (I think it should have been by the release process)
     >>
     >> I then intend to look at a fix for #188.
     >>
     >> Looking at the history, we don't appear to have done much (any?)
     >> concurrent development on multiple branches so are there views
    on how
     >> the community would prefer to apply the same fix to multiple
    branches?
     >> I think there are 2 main approaches:
     >>
     >> A. Apply the fix to 5.0.x and then merge 5.0.x into master. The idea
     >>     being any changes made to 5.0.x should normally also be made to
     >>     master.
     >>
     >> B. Apply the fix to master and then cherry-pick it for 5.0.x
     >>
     >> I have used both approaches in the past. Personally, I find B
    slightly
     >> easier to get my head around but can work with either.
     >>
     >> Thoughts?
     >
     > Given the lack of alternative views, I went with option B.
     >
     > I have staged a 5.0.1 release and and just running the TCK using the
     > staged 5.0.1 API and Tomcat's implementation. Assuming that
    passes I'll
     > release 5.0.1 to Maven Central later today.

    Done.

    Mark
    _______________________________________________
    el-dev mailing list
    el-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:el-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
    To unsubscribe from this list, visit
    https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/el-dev
    <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/el-dev>


_______________________________________________
el-dev mailing list
el-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/el-dev


Back to the top