On 18/07/2011 12:13, Łukasz Moreń wrote: > Yes, a 1.0 release. I think we should aim lower & start with a 0.1.
This will give us the chance to work towards a declaration that an eventual 1.0 is stable and bug-free. We need to be public and get user feedback to achieve that IMHO. I think most incubator projects start with a 0.1 but that's probably convention. Thoughts? p > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Pid <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 18/07/2011 11:52, Maciej Machulak wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> On 18 July 2011 10:34, Łukasz Moreń <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the >> release. >>>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is >> required >>>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?. >>> >>> Yes, this would be great. We'll then use the feedback and improve >>> what's necessary. >>> >>>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be >>>> done: >>>> >>>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in >>>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom >>> >>> Fully agree. >>> >>>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT >> (used by >>>> the core pom) - is this change safe? >>> >>> Ah, yes. This should be probably changed. >>> >>> Anyway, lets look for some feedback and then we'll make the changes. >>> It'll be great if somebody more experienced could help with the Apache >>> process (ip, voting, etc.). >> >> Do you mean that we'd be preparing a 1.0 release? Or are you referring >> to something else? >> >> >> p >> >> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Lukasz Moren >>>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Maciej >>> >> >> >> >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
