On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 20:40 -0500, Rahul Akolkar wrote: > On 1/22/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > i've uploaded RC1 to http://people.apache.org/~rdonkin/commons-logging/. > > please check and test the release candidate and report any mistakes or > > problems. > > > > you'll probably notice that the jars are numbered 1.1 (not 1.1RC1 as is > > more usual). i'd like to use a variation of the httpd/struts/tomcat > > release approval process. i'll outline how this would work tomorrow. > > > <snip/> > > Folks - > > Sincere apologies if this seems to be in the way of anyone doing the > real work. There are jars out there marked 1.1, and I'm not > comfortable with this. I'm aware of the httpd/struts/tomcat process, > but we need to collectively decide before any components start > deviating from (what I understand is) Commons policy.
it's tradition rather than policy. the only policy we have is in the charter. the rest is social convention and tradition but that doesn't mean it's not important - in fact the opposite. i have my reasons for wanting to discuss this in the VOTE thread rather than trying to achieve a consensus before hand. one is that the release needs checking and that takes a while. the release management plan can be discussed concurrently. > I'm all for JCL 1.1, but IMO, the above approach should have been > discussed before posting these files. it's just a few files posted to my home directory for checking. there hasn't been a vote and no formal announcement. it's not a release, just a bad release candidate. but thanks for highlighting the issue: i've had a chance to sleep on this and i think that they should have been versioned (even if that makes my life a lot more difficult). RC2 will be. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
