The Log4j release-2.x branch is only there because master is effectively the "release-3.x" branch right now. We forked the branch to continue 2.x releases while we started making breaking changes in the 3.x branch (mostly involving moving plugins around; the API is still the same).
On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 06:41, Thorsten Schöning <tschoen...@am-soft.de> wrote: > > Guten Tag Ralph Goers, > am Samstag, 22. August 2020 um 19:04 schrieben Sie: > > > I didn’t try to run the build from master. I checked out the > > release tag. > > The site needed to be updated without new releases in the past > already. I didn't see how this was possible without a branch, so > simply created one and thought it was a good idea to have one for new > releases as well. From what I seen, Log4j has a release-2.x branch as > well. So it might perfectly be that I didn't even consider generating > the site based on a release tag at all. > > > [...]I expected > > to see the log4cxx release version in the pom on the release tag and > > it wasn’t there. > > This heavily depends on how exactly Robert created the release and > simply needs to be debugged further. The created scripts should have > taken care of version numbers, but might not work properly under all > conditions or whatever. The goal was that "release_prepare" should > have created a branch and associated tags with correct numbers to base > releases on. In the end, "changes.xml" wasn't properly updates as well > for some reason. > > So either this needs to be debugged or, as has been discussed already, > one needs to implement new release-handling without using MVN at all. > Though I think fixing the existing problems and/or improve docs is the > easier way forward right now. > > > Once a release tag is created no modifications can > > be made so everything needs to be correct. In Log4j I only create a > > release branch from the tag if a patch to that release is required. > > To date, we have never done that. > > When I worked last on a release years ago, things were expected to get > changed or simply didn't work for some reason and that's only easily > possible with a release branch in my opinion. Manually creating > branches on each and every RC didn't seem like a good way to me. > > Mit freundlichen Grüßen, > > Thorsten Schöning > > -- > Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: thorsten.schoen...@am-soft.de > AM-SoFT IT-Systeme http://www.AM-SoFT.de/ > > Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55 > Fax...............05151- 9468- 88 > Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04 > > AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln > AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
