Better move quick on 3.2.1. Only bit I don't like about that is that it implies we shouldn't be committing anything that would lead us to want to have a 3.3.
I'm +1 for calendar defined minor releases btw. I think we should be releasing monthly, if anyone has the energy to deal with the RMing :) Hen On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com> wrote: > Also +1 to all. > > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> +1 to it all. >> >> Gary >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> >> Date:01/02/2014 05:29 (GMT-05:00) >> To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org> >> Subject: [LANG] Next steps >> >> Hi all, >> >> I've successfully gone through my first release (wasn't as bad as I had >> expected it to be). I still have to do the Jira stuff, will do that >> tonight >> probably. >> So, here is what I have in mind for lang as next steps. >> >> Move User Guide from Website to package-info.java: >> The user guide is structured in terms of packages in lang. It looks like >> the package-info.java files are better suited for this kind of >> information. >> Since Lang isn't a framework where multiple parts play together, I don't >> see the need for a "real" user guide. >> >> Push out 3.2.1: >> Although the two issues identified by Oliver and Jörg didn't block release >> 3.2, I'd like to push out a bugfix (probably containing the above changes) >> >> Move to git: >> We have talked about this a lot, and I had the feeling, that the people >> working on [lang] are fine with moving to git. I'm planning to work out a >> little guide on how to work on issues, create branches, create releases >> using git. But this will probably take a while. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Benedikt >> -- >> http://people.apache.org/~britter/ >> http://www.systemoutprintln.de/ >> http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter >> http://github.com/britter >> > >
