ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From J Pai <>
Subject Re: Ivy - Proposal for reviving the project and moving towards a release
Date Mon, 12 Dec 2016 01:53:57 GMT
I'm fine calling it a 2.4.1. The only reason I mentioned it as a beta is to
iron out any issues involved in the process itself which, from what I read
in the other thread, might involve certain challenges for the first time.


On Sunday, December 11, 2016, Matt Sicker <> wrote:
> Do we really need a beta release? If you're working on bugfixes first,
> a regular 2.4.1 release would be great. It would go through the normal
> Apache release candidate process, and perhaps we could get some Gradle
> developers to test it out as well since they still seem to be big users of
> Ivy.
> Any committer to the Ant project could prepare the release and be a
> manager. The only requirements involving PMCs is to vote on approving the
> release; adding your GPG key to the KEYS file (only PMCs can commit to
> repository involved); and committing the artifacts to the release svn
> repository (again, PMCs). I'm also not a committer, but if you're
> interested enough in maintaining Ivy, I'd guess that the PMCs may wish to
> bring you on board to do so.
> On 11 December 2016 at 08:22, Jaikiran Pai <>
>> First off, I'm not an Ivy or Ant committer. The proposal that I make
>> for an Ivy release is based on what was discussed in a recent mail thread
>> about the future of Ivy
>> There was a suggestion that someone from
>> community volunteer to try and bring in some activity into the project
>> see if we can create a release after triaging the JIRA issues.
>> I have had a look at the open issues in JIRA today and decided to filter
>> out issues that are open, updated since Jan 2014 and affects versions
>> 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4. I decided to use this as a filter criteria to just
>> a few that I thought can be considered "active". This [1] returns 57
>> issues. I went ahead and looked at those issues today and have asked for
>> more information in the JIRAs wherever relevant and have sent a couple of
>> pull requests [2] [3] to fix some straightforward ones. I also have
>> PR that I opened this week to fix one other issue. Out of those 57
>> many are no longer relevant or don't have enough details. I don't have
>> privileges to label them, share filters or even assign some to myself to
>> track them better. So I think for now, we can rely on that JIRA search
>> query [1].
>> At this point, I think, if we can target March 2017 for releasing a
>> 2.4.1-Beta-1 with fixes from the list of JIRAs I think that would be a
>> start. Some of the issues noted in that JIRA are indeed important ones
>> would need some review/help in fixing them correctly, which essentially
>> means, we need at least one person who has had experience with the Ivy
>> and its design details and also has the committer rights.
>> Does any of this look feasible? Let me know if this isn't enough to move
>> things forward - I don't want to end up sending PRs and spending time on
>> this if there's no way we can get to a proper release in the next few
>> months.
>> [1]
>> 20%3D%20IVY%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%
>> 20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20AND%20affectedVersion%20in%
>> 20(2.1.0%2C%202.2.0%2C%202.3.0%2C%202.4.0%2C%202.4.0-RC1)%
>> 20AND%20updated%20%3E%3D%202014-01-01%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC
>> [2]
>> [3]
>> -Jaikiran
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> --
> Matt Sicker <>

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message