Same here, OK for a 2.1.0 with r801820 merge, and OK for 2.1.1 without an "external" RC first (having zip on which to vote is a suffisent "release candidate" step).
Thanks, Gilles Scokart 2009/9/7 Xavier Hanin <xavier.ha...@gmail.com> > I'm ok for a 2.1.0 release with r801820 merged. > For a 2.1.1 I'm not sure a RC is really necessary... If we have only bug > fixes without too heavy changes I think releasing 2.1.1 directly without > prior RC is ok. If something goes wrong we can release a 2.1.2 and that's > fine. > > BTW, thanks a lot Maarten for your involvement and for stepping in for this > release! > > Xavier > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 23:36, Maarten Coene <maarten_co...@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > the second release candidate for Ivy is now some weeks old and it's time > we > > decide what to do next. > > > > I'd prefer to promote this RC2 as final 2.1.0 release, but merge revision > > 801820 from trunk which fixes a regression introduced in RC2. > > Furthermore, since trunk contains fixes for some annoying bugs, we could > > create a 2.1.1 release candidate later this month after the 2.1.0 final > > release is out. > > > > I'm willing to do the 2.1.0 final release if there a no other volunteers. > > > > Maarten > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org > > > > > > > -- > Xavier Hanin - 4SH France - http://www.4sh.fr/ > BordeauxJUG creator & leader - http://www.bordeauxjug.org/ > Apache Ivy Creator - http://ant.apache.org/ivy/ >
