Hi Sash, Sasvata (Shash) Chatterjee wrote on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 9:21 PM: [snip] > I personally have no big issues with turning the crank one > more time for > RC3. If we were to do it, I'd probably do the all the > dependencies, and > not just logging, since the purpose of the RCs are to catch > issues with > integrations as well, right? > > But, here's my question: what says we will not have some more > additions after RC3? Can we get some agreement that even if there > are worthwhile additions after RC3 they must wait for the next > release?
:) You look typically on your own box for extensions, when that foreign library is about to be released. But anyone following the list, should now be aware, that RC3 is high noon. > Also, on the thought of releases, I don't think we will wait 12 months > again. Personally, I plan to watch for project.xml(s) changing, and > watch to see we don't get out of whack dependency-wise across modules. > If we do that, then turining out a release frequently isn't > really that > much of a problem, as long as changes are supported by tests, and the > community wants the releases. This would be fine, but running OSS projects myself, I know the difference between plan and available time. > Anyway, I'm +1 for RC3, as long as the community backs me up when I > become a hard-ass post-RC3 :-). Also, if you get the > checkins done by > this week, Well, I am not a committer, so I need a kind person ... > then I'll make RC3 release on 21st, and still ask > for final > release vote (on 22nd) for 28th. - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
