Mark, I also would love to help, my Java is not at a level of expert but I know enough to get by.
Wasn't expecting it to be released, just thought there might have been a bleeding edge version. Seeing as the bleeding edge url is broken, I looked to the SVN... Mark I appreciate how much work is in an Eclipse 3.3 release we have discussed this before. On 7/3/07, Mark Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Brian is right, I WAS running CFEclipse on Eclipse 3.3 but I have > found some bugs and missing features I want to update to make sure > they are working, not just on Eclipse 3.3 but on 3.2 and even 3.1. > > Dean Harmon did a lot of coding at CFUnited and we got a running > version, now this running version runs from debug but there are some > issues with actually deploying it (not just running it as a debug) > which I am trying to fix before I check something in. > > My process for check-ins tends to be that every check in relates to a > bug and most of the time I am trying to check in something that > closes that bug. > > So stick with 3.2 and in the coming days I shall do a release that > you can try out, there are other things in that release that I want > to polish off and give a usable product, rather than a bleeding edge > (because it takes a lot of effort to do an update site, so might as > well do it for a useful version) > > So, we ARE on the case, and if you think about it, its rather unfair > to expect a release a WEEKEND after they have released 3.3. I barely > managed to download Eclipse 3.3 FINAL at the airport on the way > home... and you already want a fixed, tested, and deployed version by > monday (when I was doing a talk on saturday and flying home on sunday/ > monday). This is a team of one. ME. > > Its like expecting all the CF5 applications to work the day CF 6 was > released with both quality assurance and deployment on lots of > platforms with different databases. > > I am also deploying *NEW* functionality so need to make sure that > works and makes sense! > > So bear with me please. > > Or, bloody well contribute and try and fix the bugs yourselves! > > Mark Drew > > > > On 2 Jul 2007, at 15:46, Brian Kotek wrote: > > > It's a "bleeding edge" version of the codebase but it isn't the actual > > development repository. What goes into bleeding edge is still what he > > considers to be relatively stable (enough to let others use). So > > think of it > > as Beta or Release Candidate code, but not Alpha or pre-Alpha. > > > > Don't worry, it's coming. He's having to rework a good bit of stuff > > since > > the changes in 3.3 are quite extensive under the hood. > > > > > > On 7/2/07, Dan G. Switzer, II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> But it is not in the Source Repository.... > >>> > >>> I thought that this was used for bleeding edge development? > >> > >> Quite frankly, I wouldn't blame Mark at all for not checking in > >> code which > >> he thought still was buggy to public repositories. If he checks in > >> code > >> that > >> he knows is buggy, he's just going to end up opening the flood > >> gates with > >> questions. > >> > >> Now, I'm sure if he got more people who were actively helping with > >> development that policy might change. > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 The most significant release in over 10 years. Upgrade & see new features. http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion?sdid=RVJR Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:282750 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
