Well for *spec* users it is not important Matt. Le 17 sept. 2013 19:27, "Matt Benson" <[email protected]> a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Albert Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Would it be feasible to release the current trunk content as bval-1.0 and > > create a branch as 1.0.x for anyone who has a need to continue with this > > code base, then replace trunk with bval-1.1 content, which will become > the > > on-going development code base. > > > > > The problem with this approach as I see it is that we never thoroughly > ironed out the APIs in trunk. Once we call it 1.0 we are fairly well > committed to the Apache BVal APIs we have exposed, so it's important to > make those something we are all happy with. In any case I anticipate we > would have a 1.0.x branch, but for everything 1.x the APIs should be > compatible IMO. > > Matt > > > > > BTW, is the bval-11 branch implementation completed and close to TCK > > compliant. If not, what else are still missing? > > > > Thanks, > > Albert > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Matt Benson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > Romain has finished implementing Bean Validation 1.1 in his branch > [1]. > > > Meanwhile we've still never reached 1.0 with our BV 1.0 > implementation. > > > There are a number of changes on the 1.1 branch that are broadly > > > applicable and should probably be included in 1.0, but I am honestly > not > > > confident that the broadly applicable changes can be conveniently > sorted > > > from the 1.1-specific changes. I therefore propose that we allow 1.1 > to > > > become the new trunk and devise some strategy for the exclusion of 1.1 > > > features to create our 1.0 release (AIUI OWB does something similar for > > CDI > > > specification versions so maybe Mark and Romain can help in that > regard). > > > > > > Matt > > > > > > [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/bval/branches/bval-11/ > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Albert Lee. > > >
