Thanks, Jean. I agree.
-Rick
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
Rick Hillegas wrote:
Thanks, Jean. I will stop putting effort into this one.
Even with the jdbc 4.0 license issue resolved, you mentioned other
"serious defects", which makes me think that holding off on this one
would be wise. You noted that "the next distribution can be a serious
release candidate" -- maybe *that* would be the one to put on the mirrors.
Voting to put a beta on the mirrors doesn't seem like the best use of
the community's time to me unless it is a serious candidate. But that's
just my opinion....
-jean
Regards,
-Rick
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
Rick Hillegas wrote:
...
I don't know. It was suggested last week that we publish the beta to
the
mirrors to broaden its exposure. The intention wasn't to claim that it
was GA-ready. I'm trying to figure out what is entailed in publishing a
beta to the Apache mirrors. Has this been done before? Maybe I should
copy the distribution to svn.apache.org rather than www.apache.org? I'm
muddled by the description at http://www.apache.org/dev/mirrors.html.
anything that is put on the asf mirrors must be voted on, approved by
the pmc, signed etc. The asf doesn't require that a distribution be "GA
ready".
Rick, earlier in another thread [1] you wrote:
I don't think that this beta can become a release. It has some
serious defects, including the licensing issues. However, those
defects do not prevent users from testing the completed features. I'm
hoping we will get significant feedback during this beta period so
that the next distribution can be a serious release candidate
No, this should not go up on the mirrors.
-jean
[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/db-derby-dev/200608.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
