groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From C├ędric Champeau <>
Subject Re: Groovy Beta
Date Fri, 15 Jan 2016 21:27:38 GMT
Fixes should almost always be backported, unless there's a good reason not
to (for example, backporting means rewriting part of the fix). If it's not
the case, then it's a mistake. I have not been capable of checking if the
recent fixes on master have been systematically backported, but they
should. So hopefully this is just JIRA not up-to-date.

2016-01-15 21:13 GMT+01:00 Winnebeck, Jason <>

> Sorry, I wasn't clear. By snapshot I meant a declaration/tag by the
> developers. For example when Groovy team releases 2.5.0-beta1, not only is
> it something I can explain globally "we are using 2.5.0-beta1 and see xyz",
> but it also means that the team is saying the code is in a reasonable state
> for someone to use (i.e. there's not a major refactor in progress -- for
> example I have no clue if 2.5.0 being a new feature branch has a refactor
> going on).
> Anyway, knowing about the snapshot builds is useful as I can eliminate any
> potential mistake in my build process. I will try that snapshot JAR Monday
> to verify the fix for GROOVY-7705 for our application.
> I apologize about the side-tracked conversation, initially I only meant to
> ask whether or not a release was soon to know if I should go through the
> effort of validating a nightly for a production system. Since 2.5 beta is
> not soon, the only open question left for me is if GROOVY-7705 could be
> backported into 2.4.6 or at least 2.4.x (I'd feel safer with a
> 2.4.7-SNAPSHOT than 2.5.0-SNAPSHOT). I asked that in the JIRA.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pascal Schumacher []
> Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 2:54 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Groovy Beta
> Hi Jason,
> you do not have to build it yourself if you want to validate a snapshot.
> You can add as a
> maven repo and pull 2.5.0-SNAPSHOT from there.
> -Pascal
> Am 15.01.2016 um 20:46 schrieb Winnebeck, Jason:
> > I have built Groovy on my home machine successfully, it is not bad at
> all. However, I'm working on a large enterprise app, so it is nice to at
> least have some form of snapshot in time. So, I can deploy it to our local
> Maven repository under different group ID, but then I still have the
> uncertainty of pulling the latest code and not even knowing if there is a
> half-finished task or refactor going on in there, whereas with a "blessed"
> beta the team is saying they think the code is clean. I could validate the
> "tip" works in our app but that is not productive if a release is coming
> soon. There's also the awkward-ness of having a custom-built Groovy
> not-quite-2.4 but not-quite-2.5 version out and about. However, the fix is
> big enough for me that if it doesn't make it into the recent 2.4.6 release,
> I may very well go through the effort to build the tip of beta branch and
> validate.
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Russel Winder []
> > Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 2:29 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: Groovy Beta
> >
> > On Fri, 2016-01-15 at 19:05 +0000, Winnebeck, Jason wrote:
> >> A Groovy issue that affects us significantly was recently fixed in
> >> the Apache JIRA as "2.5.0-beta1". From what I can tell, there is not
> >> currently a place to download betas. Is there a plan to release a
> >> Groovy 2.5 beta milestoon soon?
> > Probably not. I compile and install from source. Takes about 22 mins on
> my workstation (which is 9 years old so I expect modern kit to do better).
> >
> > --
> > Russel.
> >
> =============================================================================
> > Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip:
> > 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp:
> > London SW11 1EN, UK   w:  skype: russel_winder
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the
> intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original
> message and any attachments.

View raw message