The release process is very streamlined on 
https://github.com/apache/grails-core/blob/7.0.x/RELEASE.md and it takes about 
two hours, split between the start day and 3 days later.  

There were 2 weeks between 7.0.0 and 7.0.1.  

Spring Boot releases monthly, between the 19th and 24th.  We will follow that 
Spring Boot release, each month, with a Grails release.

In terms of the quickest release cycle for Grails: 

[some wait period for users to report issues and fix on prior release] -> [3 
day vote new release]

We could technically overlap the votes, in an extreme situation, but 5-6 days 
would be the normal minimum between releases

I am in favor of more patch releases vs less, let's just balance quantity of 
changes in each release with frequency of releases, to avoid churn. When there 
is a majority consensus on urgency, I am onboard with overriding the normal 
minimum to release sooner.

James Fredley

On 2025/11/03 08:20:57 Gianluca Sartori wrote:
> Interesting. Yesterday I updated our Dueuno/Grails 7 branch and it was not
> downloading the 7.0.1 dependencies. I will try later, thank you!
> 
> Gianluca Sartori
> --
> https://dueuno.com
> 
> 
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 at 08:49, Mattias Reichel <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > You should be looking at
> > https://central.sonatype.com/artifact/org.apache.grails/grails-core
> > It seems https://mvnrepository.com is as fast to update.
> >
> >
> > Den mån 3 nov. 2025 kl 08:34 skrev Gianluca Sartori <[email protected]>:
> > >
> > > We need to make sure it goes to Maven Central, though — at the moment, we
> > > don’t have the 7.0.1 release there:
> > >
> > >
> > > https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.grails/grails-core
> > >
> > >
> > > Gianluca Sartori
> > > --
> > > https://dueuno.com
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 at 08:26, Gianluca Sartori <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Personally, given the phase of the project we’re in, I think releasing
> > > > three times a day, if needed, would be totally fine :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Gianluca Sartori
> > > > --
> > > > https://dueuno.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 at 04:33, James Daugherty <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Are there other bug fixes for a 7.0.2?  Isn’t it better to do more
> > > >> frequent
> > > >> builds to show we are responsive to issues?
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 11:33 AM Mattias Reichel <[email protected]>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > I don't feel it's an urgent issue as it's easy enough to remove the
> > > >> > setting of the system property in build.gradle.
> > > >> > Maybe we can get some more bug fixes into 7.0.2?
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > /Mattias
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Den sön 2 nov. 2025 kl 02:56 skrev James Daugherty <
> > > >> [email protected]
> > > >> > >:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Hi Everyone,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I opened https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pull/15194 to
> > address
> > > >> > > configuration not working in 7.x if a spring profile is defined
> > as an
> > > >> > > empty string.   An example of this scenario is that earlier
> > versions
> > > >> > > of grails recommended defining bootRun configuration like this:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > bootRun {
> > > >> > >     jvmArgs('-Dspring.output.ansi.enabled=always')
> > > >> > >     String springProfilesActive = 'spring.profiles.active'
> > > >> > >     systemProperty springProfilesActive,
> > > >> > > System.getProperty(springProfilesActive)
> > > >> > > }
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > When upgrading, this is a legitimate configuration to have, but it
> > > >> > > results in the spring.profiles.active property being set to an
> > empty
> > > >> > > String instead of null, which triggers the bug the above PR fixes.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Given that this causes configuration to not load for upgraded
> > > >> > > applications, I view this as a critical issue and wish to
> > advocate for
> > > >> > > a 7.0.2.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > What are people's thoughts on calling a vote for 7.0.2 after this
> > is
> > > >> > merged?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Regards,
> > > >> > > James
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> >
> 

Reply via email to