On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 10:05 +1300, Simon Kitching wrote: > On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 16:14 +0000, robert burrell donkin wrote: > > i've been considering for a while whether the commons should ship a > > simpler but reasonably compatible version of JCL. over the years, we've > > recommended this so many times but have always left it to the actual > > user to go away and do the work themselves. i've come to the conclusion > > that it would be a good idea for this to be available as a separate > > component. > > I'm ok with this idea. It certainly would be useful. > > However I think that JCL2.0 won't be too hard to create, and we would of > course end up generating exactly this as part of JCL2.0. So I would > probably prefer to just leave this work until then, rather than delay > the 1.1 release. If someone (you?) really wants to work on this, then > perhaps that could be done as a 1.1.1 release?
i was thinking about a completely separate commons component with an independent lifecycle. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
