ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Ant 1.7.0 beta1
Date Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:06:44 GMT
Kev Jackson wrote:
> After some off-list negotiations, Antoine and myself are agreeing to  be 
> co-release managers of Ant 1.7.

+1. Congratulations!

> I will personally build 1.7.0beta1 or pre-release and post the  
> distribution on for testing/evaluation by  
> Friday next week (29th July).
> This pre-release/beta will be based on svn trunk as it stands next  week -
> Antoine commits himself to building/releasing the next beta, and we  
> will make a rota afterwards (maybe not systematically alternating),  but 
> we'll work something out.
> The following issues need to be resolved until then :
>    - ManifestTest (I noticed that recent changes caused this to  fail, 
> but I haven't had time recently to look into it or report it -  sorry my 
> bad)
>    - svn antlib gump breaks (not sure if this is config issue as it  
> used to work fine)
>    - Stuff still on the wiki [1]
> Do you agree with this plan
> [X ] Yes


> [ ] No
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Parallel to this, we should discuss other issues :
> Whether or not we want to create an Ant 1.7 branch in SVN and when -  
> Antoine has mentioned that although this is stated in the release  
> instructions document, that some people were unhappy with branching  
> immediately - so this needs to be figured out.

I like to branch at the moment we start making decisions as to which 
changes to hold off until Ant1.8.

> We also need to discuss which (if any) of the antlibs will be  released 
> at the same time as Ant 1.7.  I think that we should at  least release 
> the svn antlib (if we can get a clean gump build!) as  it's one of the 
> most requested features.

> Also I notice that the WHATSNEW is apparently incorrect, there is  
> mention of a <libraries> task in it, but Steve suggested we point  
> people to ivy and/or maven2, so this confusion over the libraries  task 
> (in or out) needs to be cleaned up/removed from the WHATSNEW  document.

yes. And we should have fetch.xml included in the release and pull down 
both the ivy and m2 tasks *and* verify their signatures

> Thanks
> (I'm quaking in my boots with responsibility now that I've committed  to 
> do this :) )

Oh, we will all help. you just get the power of the veto.

> Kev
> [1]

Remember, anyone is free to change this :)

I will try and get a couple of changes in this week,
-some tweaks to script support that I felt were missing (fail on 
<scriptdef> on missing artifacts if an attribute says so)
-maybe a slight change in the resource class tree to make the UML prettier.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message