qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components
Date Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:37:58 GMT
On 11 November 2015 at 14:54, Justin Ross <justin.ross@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemmell@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> However for me the first thing to decide is probably who will do the
>> source tree reorg, and when, since we have really been at this point
>> before and it didnt go anywhere in the end for these bits. It needs
>> folks familiar with the bits in question to help do the move and
>> ensure it goes smoothly, otherwise they could end up in their nice new
>> tree (/repo eventually?) in a not-so-functional state.
> I've taken a stab at this once, and collected some notes.  I moved the C++
> broker related tools and qmf/console.py into the cpp tree and adjusted
> cmake and the test environment scripts to pick them up.  I stopped short of
> really proving it out, but I think a second attempt would find success.


> I propose to start the process for a Qpid C++ release once we've completed
> the next Proton release, targeting it about a month after.  Proton 0.12.0
> is set for the end of January, and so I'd set Qpid C++ 1.35.0 for the end
> of February.

Just to clarify, with "completed the next Proton release" do you mean
0.11.0, or 0.12.0? If the former, sounds good. If the latter, it seems
quite a long time to wait given the improvements and fixes already
there since qpid-cpp 0.34 back in June.

> IMO, we should make the jump to git at the same time, but it's not critical.


> Justin

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org

View raw message