Proposed IcedTea 6 release

[Andrew John Hughes]

2009/8/7 Lillian Angel <langel at redhat.com>:
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 11:03 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 09:36 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There's the ARM work from Ed Nevill too.  We need to look at exactly
>>>>> which
>>>>> version of LLVM to target with Shark.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we should get the ARM changes in ASAP, and then branch with a
>>>>> view
>>>>> to stabilizing over the next couple of weeks.  Various people are away
>>>>> on
>>>>> holiday, so this might be a somewhat extended test cycle.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If it will take weeks to integrate and test I suggest that it should be
>>>> done in the next release. Getting out a release with all the security
>>>> fixes asap will be a good thing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 1.  We need to do a minor release with security patches now, on the
>>> previous
>>>    release branch.
>>>
>>> 2.  We need to get everything together for the next *major* release.
>>>  This
>>>    involves committing all major fixes to the trunk, then branching for
>>>    stabilization.
>>>
>>
>> OK, then I misunderstood. I thought we were at the end of the major
>> release cycle and wanted to do a new release now with the updated
>> hotspot, plugin, webstart stuff, bugfixes and the security releases now.
>>
>
> That was my understanding. What is the reason to have a minor security
> release upon the old branch?
>

If we're going to delay the new release to get the ARM thing in and
then test it, it may be weeks before a release appears with the
security fixes.  The minor release would fill this gap, ensuring there
is a patched release but without a need for extensive testing of new
features/changes.

All we need to do is apply the security fixes to the 1.5 branch as we
did with the main tree and then release the result as 1.5.1.

>
> Cheers,
> Lillian
>
>> Which seems like a good idea to me. But getting out only those security
>> fixes asap is also fine if we don't feel the current trunk is release
>> worthy (I think it is though). If not, then I also retract my idea to
>> sync with oj6b17 before release since that is obvious too risky also
>> then.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
http://openjdk.java.net

PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8