Re: [ee4j-pmc] Release process

["Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Jan,
As I mentioned
in one my earlier replies, I would just go ahead and create a Release Record
for the 2.30 release and schedule a review.  Yes, it's past your official
release, but we're within the "forgiveness range".  :-)
 https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/ee4j.jersey Unless there is something you are going to fix, I see no reason for
a 2.30.1 release just to satisfy the process.

The tyrus page
is here:  https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/ee4j.tyrus According to this, the last review was in Dec 2018.  Thus, a
new release of Tyrus should go through a review as well.

Hope this helps.

---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter



From:
       Jan
Supol <jan.supol@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:
       ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date:
       01/15/2020
06:34
Subject:
       [EXTERNAL]
Re: [ee4j-pmc] Release process
Sent
by:        ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Jersey 2.30 has been released and
it is available in maven central. 
Jersey 2.30 is a service release meaning it does not break any backward
compatibility. It provides some additional functionality, however. The
last release review was in November 2018.

The truth is I was not aware about the one year period and I did not 
check the release process. If the release review is needed, we can 
create a new Jersey 2.30.1 release and go through the release review 
with that one.

We also plan to release a new version of Tyrus. It contains mostly bug
fixes, but there is a new configuration option.

Please let us know whether we need release review for Jersey and Tyrus.

Thanks,

Jan

On 15.01.2020 8:10, Bill Shannon wrote:
> I believe Jersey 2.30 falls into this clause:
>
>> Further, a review is not required for release if the project has
>> engaged in a successful release review within a year of the release
date.
>
>
> Markus KARG wrote on 1/14/20 9:49 PM:
>>
>> But is Jersey 2.30 really just a bug fix release? I understood
it 
>> also contains new features, according to SemVer.
>>
>> -Markus
>>
>> *Von:*ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
>> [mailto:ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
*Im Auftrag von *EMO EMO
>> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 14. Januar 2020 23:02
>> *An:* EE4J PMC Discussions
>> *Betreff:* Re: [ee4j-pmc] Release process
>>
>> Release reviews are not required for service (bug fix only) releases.
>>
>> Further, a review is not required for release if the project has
>> engaged in a successful release review within a year of the release
date.
>>
>> The rules are slightly different for specification projects which
>> require ballot approval from the specification committee for all
>> releases. But that doesn't apply to Eclipse Jersey.
>>
>> HTH,
>>
>> Wayne
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 3:11 PM Dmitry Kornilov 
>> <dmitry.kornilov@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dmitry.kornilov@xxxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:
>>
>>     Jersey 2.30 is a service release. It’s our mistake
to not going
>>     through the review process. Id it fine if we submit
a review for
>>     already released project? If not, what shall we
do?
>>
>>     - Dmitry
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 13 Jan 2020, at 15:56, Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx
>>     <mailto:sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:
>>
>>     Hi Christian,
>>     The Project Handbook
>>     <https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#release>indicates
>>     that a successful release review allows a project
to distribute
>>     new major or minor releases for up to one year:
>>
>>     "A project team may declare official major
or minor releases and
>>     distribute associated products for up to one year
following a
>>     successful /release or progress review/
>>     <https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#release-review>.
>>     Reviews are not required for bug-fix/service releases."
>>
>>     So, based on that, the Jersey project was okay with
their 2.29
>>     and 2.29.1 releases, but the 2.30 release needs
to have a
>>     successful release review.  The project seems
to be in a state of
>>     flux since the 2.30 release is not officially marked
as a public
>>     release yet in github...
>>     https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jersey/releases.  There is a tag
>>     for it, but not a release...
>>
>>     Bottom line, Christian, I think your understanding
is correct and
>>     Jersey needs to tidy things up a bit.  We do
have to remember
>>     that the Eclispe processes are new to most of us,
so there will
>>     be some hiccups along the way while we all get our
feet wet.  Thanks!
>>
>>     ---------------------------------------------------
>>     Kevin Sutter
>>     STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
>>     e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>
   
>>     Twitter:  @kwsutter
>>     phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
>>     LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
>>
>>
>>
>>     From: "Steve Millidge (Payara)" <steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>     <mailto:steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
>>     To: EE4J PMC Discussions <ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>     <mailto:ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
>>     Cc: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>     <mailto:ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
>>     Date: 01/13/2020 06:19
>>     Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ee4j-pmc] Release process
>>     Sent by: ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>     <mailto:ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     I am not an expert on the process so I could be
wrong but my
>>     understanding is that once a project has a successful
release
>>     review it can make further releases for a year without
a formal
>>     review. I assume a release record is still required
though but
>>     Wayne or Ivar can correct me.
>>
>>     I just googled and this blog seems to also say the
same
>>     https://blogs.eclipse.org/post/wayne-beaton/progress-and-release-reviews
>>
>>     Steve
>>
>>     *From:*ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>     <mailto:ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>     <ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>     <mailto:ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
*On Behalf Of *Christian
>>     Kaltepoth*
>>     Sent:* 12 January 2020 11:30*
>>     To:* EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>     <mailto:ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>>;
EE4J PMC Discussions
>>     <ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>>*
>>     Subject:* [ee4j-pmc] Release process
>>
>>     Hi all,
>>
>>     I'm currently working on the first Eclipse Krazo
release. As this
>>     is our first release under the umbrella of the EE4J
project, I
>>     would like to ask a few questions about the process,
especially
>>     regarding release reviews.
>>
>>     I just checked the project site
>>     <https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/ee4j.jersey/>of
Eclipse
>>     Jersey, because I was interested to see how other
projects are
>>     doing it. Eclipse Jersey published versions like
2.28, 2.29 or
>>     2.29.1. So it looks like they are following the
"major.minor" and
>>     "major.minor.patch" versioning scheme.
The Eclipse Project
>>     Handbook states:
>>
>>     All major and minor releases require a review. Service
releases
>>     [...] do not require a review.
>>
>>     There was a release review for the 2.28 release.
That's fine. But
>>     there wasn't one for the 2.29 release. But isn't
this required
>>     for a non-service release? There is also only an
IP Log for 2.28
>>     <https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19586>but
not
>>     for 2.29.
>>
>>     Also, Eclipse Jersey released 2.30 a few days ago
and the release
>>     is already available in Maven Central
>>     <https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/glassfish/jersey/core/jersey-common/2.30/>.
>>     However, there isn't any entry for 2.30 in the "Latest
Releases"
>>     table on the Jersey project site
>>     <https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/ee4j.jersey>.
So it looks
>>     like there isn't any release plan and also no release
review for
>>     2.30.
>>
>>     Am I missing something here?
>>
>>     Christian
>>
>>     -- 
>>
>>     Christian Kaltepoth
>>
>>     Blog: http://blog.kaltepoth.de/
>>
>>     Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
>>
>>     GitHub: https://github.com/chkal
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     ee4j-pmc mailing list
>>     ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>     To change your delivery options, retrieve your password,
or
>>     unsubscribe from this list, visit
>>     https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     ee4j-pmc mailing list
>>     ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>     To change your delivery options, retrieve your password,
or
>>     unsubscribe from this list, visit
>>     https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     ee4j-pmc mailing list
>>     ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>     To change your delivery options, retrieve your password,
or
>>     unsubscribe from this list, visit
>>     https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> The Eclipse Management Organization
>> Eclipse Foundation
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ee4j-pmc mailing list
>> ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
>> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ee4j-pmc mailing list
> ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc