+1 whatever the naming. I think that an official release replacing the 0.9.0 with its broken WS binding would be really nice to have indeed.
Rgds Le jeudi 8 août 2013, Peter Monks a écrit : > Thanks Florian. If a v1.0 is that close, I'd vote for doing whatever's > necessary to get it to that point, even if it delays the bug fixes etc. a > bit. I've had a little pushback (not much, but not zero either) from > potential users of the library because of a perception that it's > "pre-release" (based solely on the version number, as best I can tell). > > Cheers, > Peter > > > > > > > > On Aug 8, 2013, at 8:32 AM, Florian Müller <[email protected]> wrote: > > > We have full CMIS 1.1 support now. > > If the community feels comfortable calling it 1.0 we can do that. Any > opinions? > > > > I think we should improve the JavaDoc to a point that it sufficiently > covers all public APIs and then call it 1.0. There are also some places > that need cleaning. But I don't expect that we add any major functionality > in the near future. > > > > > > - Florian > > > > > >> On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Peter Monks wrote: > >>> +1, but as a side note, what's the gating factor on a v1.0? > >> > >> Full CMIS v1.1 support might seem a good reason for the version bump? > >> > >> Nick > > > > -- - Alexis Meneses Sent from mobile phone
