> > I am all for 1.2.2 - if someone downloaded the 1.2.1, he'll be confused - > releasing 1.2.2, we spare everyone the potential confusion. It is highly > normal to skip a point-release, that's really not a problem, I would think.
I agree, +1 for 1.2.2 On Jan 22, 2008 12:20 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > whoops, > belongs to another email :) > > On Jan 21, 2008 2:12 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > after removing > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?> > > works.... > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2008 2:03 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > as of now, > > > I am also fine with a 1.2.2; > > > > > > but I really noticed not a common agreement on using 1.2.2 > > > > > > IMO the 1.2.1 would be updated, by maven. > > > > > > (unless you run in offline mode, which is totally broken anyway) > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2008 2:00 PM, Martin Marinschek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I am all for 1.2.2 - if someone downloaded the 1.2.1, he'll be > confused - > > > > releasing 1.2.2, we spare everyone the potential confusion. It is > highly > > > > normal to skip a point-release, that's really not a problem, I would > think. > > > > > > > > I thought that was already the outcome of the discussion on the > dev-list, as > > > > I understood it. > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2008 10:31 PM, Paul Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Because artifacts where published, even if that was not the > intent, the > > > > > version number should be consider used. > > > > > > > > > > Paul Spencer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2008 1:08 PM, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > >> If something was publicly released as 1.2.1 already, then -- > even if > > > > > >> it was pulled -- please do not release 1.2.1 again. > > > > > > > > > > > > it wasn't released. Just the impl jars made it to public repo. > > > > > > which is (from the effect) close to a release ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > -M > > > > > > > > > > > >> Skipping a version number might cause some questions on the > list. > > > > > >> However, reusing a version number will result in the end user > not > > > > > >> knowing if they have the "good version" or the "bad version", > nor will > > > > > >> anyone who tries to help them debug issues. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Jan 21, 2008 4:00 PM, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > >>> So we agree on 1.2.2? > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > > > Courses in English and German > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > further stuff: > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > further stuff: > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > further stuff: > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org >
