Yes, we have a 2.0 roadmap, but I don't think it has much visibility outside of developers and power users, and we're not easily confused.
However, I think someone could reasonably expect to go from 1.2 to 1.3 and not have everything completely break. That would be a far more confusing situation in my opinion. On 4/7/06, Cris Daniluk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I'm with Cris on this. +1 for migrating all history into apache SVN. > > +1 for a "repackaging" release of cayenne with a minimal amount of > > code changes. I think doing this right after the 1.2 release makes a > > great deal of sense. I'd recommend calling it 2.0 rather than "apache > > 1.2" though since it's no longer backwards compatible. > > > > > We have a 2.0 roadmap, so it might be confusing. Hmm... we could always > start the versioning over at Apache Cayenne 1.0, but that might be even more > confusing! Agree on not calling it "1.2 apache" though. > > Cris > >
