[jdom-interest] Preparing JDOM 1.1.2 ?
jdom at tuis.net
Wed Aug 31 22:22:01 PDT 2011
I have set up the process/infrastructure for JDOM 1.1.2
I initially set up the github branches incorrectly. I used 'branch'
structures to indicate previous JDOM releases, when I should have used
plain tags. So, I have removed the branch called jdom-1.1.1 and instead
created a tag called jdom-1.1.1 (I also moved it from the revision it
was on to the actual revision used for jdom-1.1.1).
I have now created a branch jdom-1.x which will be used as the
development branch for future pre-JDOM2 development/fixes.
The process for the above changes can be read up on at:
(see the update near the bottom...).
I have gone through the issues (open and closed) in github and I have
'labelled' those issues I believe are good for backporting to jdom-1.1.2
If any new issues arise, or if anyone thinks there are issues on that
list which should or should not be backported to 1.1.2 then please speak
up. I intend to start working on the backport quite soon (it should be
really quick and easy). The bigger problem is that I have not yet
finished the junit testing, so there may be some more issues that arise.
I expec that by the end of next week the junit testing will be
sufficient for JDOM2 work.
On 30/08/2011 6:15 PM, Jason Hunter wrote:
> On Aug 25, 2011, at 11:50 AM, Rolf Lear wrote:
>> Hi all
>> Jason, the way I understand it is that we are intending a 1.1.2 release.
>> There are some issues in GitHub targeting that release.
>> I think it is worth discussing some fixes for a JDOM 1.1.2 release.
>> Currently the list of 1.1.2 Milestone issues is:
>> #1 Namespace for default attributes from XMLSchema
>> #3 Should have a build in Maven Central
>> I am unsure of how much priority should be put on 1.1.2 items. On the one
>> hand, I think that these issues are high priority, and should be addressed.
>> On the other hand, I find it hard to figure out where to draw the line.
> My general feeling is we should do a 1.1.2 with any bug fixes that are low-risk, don't introduce any compatibility issues, and will be coded up soon.
>> Also, the Maven issue is probably quite disruptive in terms of code
>> impact.... and, I feel it would be a lot of effort to 'mavenize' both 1.1.2
>> and 2.0... I see that issue (#3) as being a 2.0 milestone, not 1.1.2
> Why the code impact? I wasn't suggesting we use Maven, just put builds out there so others who use Maven can fetch JDOM builds. Looks like others have been doing this for us up til now:
>> There are some other issues already filed which could be part of 1.1.2,
>> but no-one has properly addressed. Things like
>> https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/issues/9 - BaseURI not output.
>> Also, what I am finding is that as I go through adding JUnit tests I have
>> encountered a number of small issues. Each of them is trivial to fix (so
>> far, anyway), but, when taken together, there are enough to warrant a 1.1.2
>> release. Further, I am sure that there will be even more as I cover more of
>> the JDOM code. I have been itemizing these small issues in GitHub as I go
>> so that I can 'document' what has changed, but the same items can be used
>> to fix 1.1.2.
>> I have been concentrating on the JDOM2 coverage, but, I think it would
>> make sense to also get a 1.1.2 branch going, and clearing up some of the
>> 1.1.2 issues.
>> That is, assuming we are planning a 1.1.2 release.... we are, aren't we?
> It seems like a good idea, targeted to people who are conservative.
>> I have inspected the branch on GitHub labeled as JDOM-1.1.1. There is one
>> difference between that branch, and the actual code released as 1.1.1, and
>> that is commit
>> It seems to me that I can move the 1.1.1 branch back up one commit, and
>> then branch the 1.1.2 from where the 1.1.1 was. it seems simple in my head,
>> but I will have to research the best way to do it in my head.
> Cool. Please when you're done add to the wiki how you did it, since it'll help all us git-noobs learn. BTW, I have git-guru friends if we need to ask them.
>> Once we get a 1.1.2 branch going it should be easy for me to apply any
>> fixes to both 2.0 and 1.1.2 (if we agree that they should be back-ported to
>> Anyway, the way I see it is that a 1.1.2 release should be 'planned' ( -
>> or completely dismissed and just roll things in to 2.0.0).
> I feel like there would be demand for a 1.1.2 that's basically a risk-free drop-in upgrade for people on 1.1.1 that includes some fixes.
More information about the jdom-interest