I would defer for as long as possible the creation of a branch. Until
we start committing the api incompatible changes, I don't think we
should create a branch.
And yeah, camel-1.5 is fine. The actual version number of the release
is 1.5.0 right now, so we could follow up with 1.5.x and not go to
1.6. Hopefully 2.0 is not more than a few months down the road.
Hadrian
On Oct 29, 2008, at 9:55 AM, James Strachan wrote:
Sounds good with me. camel-1.5 is fine with me. Kinda like 1.5.x
though to imply 'the next 1.5 release' but don't mind too much.
2008/10/29 Jonathan Anstey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Now that the 1.5 release is pretty much complete I'm thinking of
setting up
a branch so we can start hacking on 2.0 stuff more freely. I guess
there are
several options on names
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/activemq/camel/branches/camel-1.5
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/activemq/camel/branches/camel-1.5.x
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/activemq/camel/branches/camel-1.x
I prefer camel-1.5 since it follows ActiveMQ's branching convention
- does
anybody else have a preference?
I'm also going to set up http://www.orcaware.com/svn/wiki/
Svnmerge.py on
that branch so we can have nice merge tracking between trunk and
the branch.
Cheers,
Jon
--
James
-------
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
Open Source Integration
http://fusesource.com/
