Gerhard pointed out to me that there may be other items we want to look at (e.g. Apache* classnames) in addition to the logging discussion before we call our implementation "baked enough for 1.0". I tend to agree with him and will proceed with 0.4 to be followed with a 1.0 in the near future, unless anyone disagrees.
Matt On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > Folks this logging discussion sucks ^^ > > Ok, not the _discussion_ sucks, the topic does ;) > > We need this stuff over and over again, and I really do think this loudly > cries out for a commons-logging-2 or so. > > I already wrote this to the commons list, because we have this discussion > over and over again on various projects. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: >> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 6:18 PM >> Subject: Re: Are we ready for a 1.0 release candidate? >> >> hi matt, >> >> +1! for a release, but i'm not sure if we should call it v1.0 already (if i >> remember correctly, we still don't have an agreement e.g. about the logging >> framework). >> >> regards, >> gerhard >> >> >> >> 2012/3/13 Matt Benson <[email protected]> >> >>> Subject says it all. Some of our other Apache TLPs would like to see >>> us make a release. It's been a long time since 0.3-incubating, and >>> 1.0 would be a great way to inaugurate the project after having moved >>> to TLP. >>> >>> Matt >>> >>
