Hi Matthias, the overall plan looks good to me. Just a question to
make sure I understood.

- on master - Keycloak 1.7.0.Final

- on 1.1.x branch - Keycloak 1.5.0.Final

Is that correct?

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> for early Jan, I'd like to get the UPS-1.1.1 out:
> https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327457
>
> Not sure we will be doing a 1.1.2 later, but maybe... given these JIRAs:
> https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12323762
>
> The next minor version will be 1.2.0:
> https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327301
>
> However, I had quick chat w/ Lukas in the morning, that we already have KC
> version update on master, but that really should not be in a 1.1.x patch
> version.
>
> Here is the proposal of what to do:
> * I branch of master for a 1.1.x patch branch, and on that branch, I simply
> rewert the KC update.
> * Obviously on master we keep the update, but also update the version there
> to 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT
>
> Also, since "active" branches are a PITA (we had that on 1.0.x), the idea is
> that the 1.1.x branch will be deleted ASAP, e.g. once  we get out 1.1.1
> shipped. In case we do a 1.1.2, we'd simple create a new 1.1.x branch of the
> 1.1.1 TAG.
>
> But on master, things will be moving forward, towards UPS 1.2.0
>
>
> Any thoughts?
>
>
> -Matthias
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>

> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev



--
- abstractj

_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev