Hi there and Happy New Year! following up on the discussions about AS branching: a) the branch that produced AS 5.0.0.GA should be considered "dead". We won't be doing a dot release from this branch (5.0.1.CR1) https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0/ b) trunk was instead branched into: https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_x/ The next AS release to fix 5.0.0 glitches and introduce any missing EAP features will be 5.1. As it is now the branch produces 5.1.0.Beta1 but I'm not clear yet if we have time for a Beta1 version; maybe we have to go directly to CR1. c) trunk will produce the next AS6 release (6.0.0.Alpha1) https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/trunk/ This is still WIP as to how exactly AS6 will look like, or if it will further broken out. JIRA needs adjustment, so that all the 5.0.0.CR1 issues move to 5.1.0.Beta1. It also needs a good cleaning up as we'll have more than 200 tasks scheduled for 5.1. Hudson will be adjusted accordingly, too. When we have a clearer idea about the effort needed for 5.1 we'll come up with target dates. Cheers /Dimitris PS for David: branch/Branch_xyz is just legacy from the CVS days...

Yes, Branch_5_x, and trunk as well. Howard Gao wrote: > Happy New Year Dimitirs! Your message comes just in good time. :) I > am about to commit JBM examples into Branch_5_0 so I think now > Branch_5_x is the one! > > Howard > > > > Dimitris Andreadis wrote: >> Hi there and Happy New Year! >> >> following up on the discussions about AS branching: >> >> a) the branch that produced AS 5.0.0.GA should be considered "dead". >> We won't be doing a dot release from this branch (5.0.1.CR1) >> https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0/ >> >> b) trunk was instead branched into: >> https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_x/ >> The next AS release to fix 5.0.0 glitches and introduce any missing >> EAP features will be 5.1. As it is now the branch produces >> 5.1.0.Beta1 but I'm not clear yet if we have time for a Beta1 >> version; maybe we have to go directly to CR1. >> >> c) trunk will produce the next AS6 release (6.0.0.Alpha1) >> https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/trunk/ >> This is still WIP as to how exactly AS6 will look like, or if it >> will further broken out. >> >> JIRA needs adjustment, so that all the 5.0.0.CR1 issues move to >> 5.1.0.Beta1. It also needs a good cleaning up as we'll have more >> than 200 tasks scheduled for 5.1. >> >> Hudson will be adjusted accordingly, too. >> >> When we have a clearer idea about the effort needed for 5.1 we'll >> come up with target dates. >> >> Cheers >> /Dimitris >> >> PS >> for David: branch/Branch_xyz is just legacy from the CVS days... >> >

> a) the branch that produced AS 5.0.0.GA should be considered "dead". > We won't be doing a dot release from this branch (5.0.1.CR1) > https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0/ > Can it be renamed to https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0_DEAD?

I suppose the other option would be to make it read-only in authz_svn.conf Dimitris Andreadis wrote: > svn rename is really copy+delete. Do you have any idea if it will > affect tags taken out of Branch_5_0? If not, I suppose we can do it. > Kabir Khan wrote: >>> a) the branch that produced AS 5.0.0.GA should be considered >>> "dead". We won't be doing a dot release from this branch >>> (5.0.1.CR1) >>> https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0/ >>> >> >> Can it be renamed to https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0_DEAD?

Renaming/removing the branch won't have any effect on the tags [1]. But I don't think renaming it to _Dead is a good idea. If it really is dead, then why not just delete it? You can always create a branch from one of the tags if you find that you need the branch again. [1] http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.branchmerge.maint.html Dimitris Andreadis wrote: > I suppose the other option would be to make it read-only in > authz_svn.conf > > Dimitris Andreadis wrote: >> svn rename is really copy+delete. Do you have any idea if it will >> affect tags taken out of Branch_5_0? If not, I suppose we can do it. >> >> Kabir Khan wrote: >>>> a) the branch that produced AS 5.0.0.GA should be considered >>>> "dead". We won't be doing a dot release from this branch (5.0.1.CR1) >>>> https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0/ >>>> >>> >>> Can it be renamed to >>> https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0_DEAD?

if you want to prevent commits then just adjust the /admin/authz_svn.conf to make that branch readonly. /max > Renaming/removing the branch won't have any effect on the tags [1]. > But I don't think renaming it to _Dead is a good idea. If it really > is dead, then why not just delete it? You can always create a branch > from one of the tags if you find that you need the branch again. > > [1] http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.branchmerge.maint.html > > Dimitris Andreadis wrote: >> I suppose the other option would be to make it read-only in >> authz_svn.conf >> >> Dimitris Andreadis wrote: >>> svn rename is really copy+delete. Do you have any idea if it will >>> affect tags taken out of Branch_5_0? If not, I suppose we can do it. >>> >>> Kabir Khan wrote: >>>>> a) the branch that produced AS 5.0.0.GA should be considered >>>>> "dead". We won't be doing a dot release from this branch (5.0.1.CR1) >>>>> https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> Can it be renamed to >>>> https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0_DEAD? >> _______________________________________________ >> jboss-development mailing list >> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development > > _______________________________________________ > jboss-development mailing list > jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development _______________________________________________ jboss-development mailing list jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development

PS for David: branch/Branch_xyz is just legacy from the CVS days...