-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 594
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add release 10.1.2 release notes, update to Akka 2.5.13 #2058
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
Test PASSed. |
Bitting nails until this is out! (playframework/playframework#8464) :-) |
Test PASSed. |
project/AkkaDependency.scala
Outdated
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ object AkkaDependency { | |||
// else if akka version is "default", then the hard coded default will be used (jenkins doesn't allow empty values for config axis) | |||
// else if akka.version is anything else, then the given version will be used | |||
|
|||
val defaultAkkaVersion = "2.5.12" | |||
val defaultAkkaVersion = "2.5.13" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this needed? Did we add something that is required for Akka HTTP? Otherwise we should be stay behind on the Akka versions so that it still works with older versions if someone prefers that. This is even more important now when it is not a transitive dependency.
How was it? We added that mininum version check? Is that automatically picking up the version number from here or is it defined somewhere else also?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, updating the Akka version was still mentioned in RELEASING.md as a release step but indeed that might not make sense anymore (and would even be somewhat dangerous).
I don't see a version check (though I also remember discussing adding one). 10.1.1 still had version 2.5.11, perhaps we should even revert to that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's more important to get this release out now than testing again with another version. Seems things have been tested with 2.5.12
so let's stick with that.
I think this should be followed up afterwards. Lookin to the version checking again, and document this aspect in RELEASING.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
and here is the PR for the version checking that was closed without merging #1880
Test PASSed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Test PASSed. |
Test PASSed. |
Branch can be deleted I assume? Please do so so we don't have too many confusing branches in the main repo |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Late LGTM, good notes - thanks!
No description provided.