Re: [MJLINK] Move from 3.0.1 to 3.1.0

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MJLINK] Move from 3.0.1 to 3.1.0

Sylwester Lachiewicz
+1 for 3.1.0 release

wt., 15 gru 2020 o 22:38 Benjamin Marwell <[hidden email]> napisał(a):

>
> Hello everyone,
>
> looking at the issues already solved and soon-be-solved, the next release
> feels much more like a 3.1.0 release than a 3.0.1 (bugfix) release [1].
>
> If you agree, I would like to update the git repository to 3.1.0 and create
> a 3.0.x branch from the last release, if needed.
>
> I would also like to request some help with the documentation [2].
> Currently it says that an extra 'dist' project is needed, but with the
> introduction of classifiers (or moving the main jar away using a
> classifier), this does not hold true anymore.
>
> Third, I would like to move MJLINK-39 [3] to a 3.2.0 release (or even
> "won’t fix"), as the 'vm' option only applies to 32bit vms and is not even
> documented anymore – only 'jlink --plugin-list' shows its usage.
>
> Summary:
> 4 issues left, of which are:
> 1 with PR to be merged (update plexus-utils)
> 1 with PR half-way done (--add-options for launcher script)
> 1 documentation to be done
> 1 to be moved away or "wont’t fix".
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Ben
>
> [1]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJLINK-60?jql=project%20%3D%20MJLINK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%203.0.1
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJLINK-49
> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJLINK-39

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MJLINK] Move from 3.0.1 to 3.1.0

Hervé BOUTEMY
given the number of new features, yes, switching to 3.1.0 makes sense
I just renamed the next release to 3.1.0 in Jira (I fear you don't have
permissions)

No need to create 3.0.x Git branch for now, unless you really have a specific
reason to do so: we generally don't try to maintain multiple versions in
parallel

Don't hesitate to ping if there are tasks you don't have permissions

Regards,

Hervé

Le mardi 15 décembre 2020, 22:37:21 CET Benjamin Marwell a écrit :

> Hello everyone,
>
> looking at the issues already solved and soon-be-solved, the next release
> feels much more like a 3.1.0 release than a 3.0.1 (bugfix) release [1].
>
> If you agree, I would like to update the git repository to 3.1.0 and create
> a 3.0.x branch from the last release, if needed.
>
> I would also like to request some help with the documentation [2].
> Currently it says that an extra 'dist' project is needed, but with the
> introduction of classifiers (or moving the main jar away using a
> classifier), this does not hold true anymore.
>
> Third, I would like to move MJLINK-39 [3] to a 3.2.0 release (or even
> "won’t fix"), as the 'vm' option only applies to 32bit vms and is not even
> documented anymore – only 'jlink --plugin-list' shows its usage.
>
> Summary:
> 4 issues left, of which are:
> 1 with PR to be merged (update plexus-utils)
> 1 with PR half-way done (--add-options for launcher script)
> 1 documentation to be done
> 1 to be moved away or "wont’t fix".
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Ben
>
> [1]
> <a href="https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJLINK-60?jql=project%20%3D%20MJLINK%2">https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJLINK-60?jql=project%20%3D%20MJLINK%2
> 0AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%203.0.1 [2]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJLINK-49
> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJLINK-39





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]