idem,
+1
Nicolas
Le 7 sept. 09 à 12:50, Gilles Scokart a écrit :
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/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
