On 28 March 2014 15:06, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> wrote: > 2014-03-28 16:04 GMT+01:00 sebb <seb...@gmail.com>: > >> On 28 March 2014 15:00, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> wrote: >> > 2014-03-28 14:50 GMT+01:00 sebb <seb...@gmail.com>: >> > >> >> On 28 March 2014 09:34, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> > Hi guys, >> >> > >> >> > some of you have already discussed LANG-992. Do we need to push out an >> >> > immediate bugfix after we have resolved this? >> >> >> >> Perhaps. >> >> >> >> > Is this issue fixed in http://svn.apache.org/r1582585 ? >> >> >> >> Yes, AFAIK. >> >> >> >> > I'll have some time this weekend to create an RC. >> >> >> >> If so, IMO it should be 3.3.2 rather than 3.4. >> >> >> > >> > Yes, usually I set the version to the next minor after doing a release. >> > That's why it has been set to 3.4-SNAPSHOT after 3.3.1 >> > >> > >> >> >> >> There seems to be one new field: >> >> >> >> SystemUtils.IS_JAVA_1_8 >> >> >> > >> > my opinion is, that the clirr report for a patch release should be empty. >> > In this case Clirr will show one info, so following this convention is >> > would be 3.4. OTOH a minor release should introduce a few more features >> > beside a new field... >> >> Exactly; this is such a trivial change I don't think it warrants a >> minor version bump. >> It could be considered as a bug fix (but not a regression, as is the >> case for the octal issue) >> > > Okay, I'll prepare 3.3.2 RC1 tomorrow morning.
Thanks a lot! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
