[jdom-interest] Preparing JDOM 1.1.2 ?

[Jason Hunter]

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
> https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/issues/1
> #3 Should have a build in Maven Central
> https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/issues/3
> 
> 
> 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:

http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/jdom/jdom

> 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
> https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/commit/ea30b1e2b614f4b7d49de8a95af71fe3fb52ae2b
> 
> 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
> 1.1.2).
> 
> 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.

-jh-