--- Dirk Verbeeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Same response, I don't really have a strong feeling about it, just 
> wanted to keep in sync with DBCP (at least the mayor version).

Pool is independent from DBCP and doesn't need to depend on DBCP's version
numbers.  Backwards incompatible changes trigger a major version change,
not necessarily changes in other projects.

David

> 
> OK, no incompatible changes => keep major number.
> 
> New proposal:
> Release both DBCP & pool as 1.1
> 
> Dirk
> 
> David Graham wrote:
> 
> >I have the same question here as I did for DBCP: are there any
> backwards
> >incompatible changes that require a major release number change?  I'd
> >prefer to keep the major number the same if possible.  
> >
> >FWIW, I haven't seen any incompatible changes in the DBCP or Pool
> commits
> >that I've reviewed.
> >
> >David
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to