Andrew Savory wrote: > Hi, > > On 10 Oct 2005, at 08:43, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > > >>As soon as we have 2.2 we definitly want that users start with 2.2 and >>not with 2.1.x anymore. So having a binary release only for 2.2 might >>help with this as well :) > > > Depends when we think 2.2 might be released (I mean full release, not > milestone release). > > If we're talking about maybe a month, then I suppose it's not a problem. > > If we're talking about 6 months - well, do we really want to give a > substandard user experience for that long? > Hehe, good question :) Now, noone knows when 2.2 final will be out, so it might be in two months or it might take another year if people might loose interest/energy.
But I think our first milestone of 2.2 will be stable and a "full replacement" of 2.1.x, so we will recommend to prefer 2.2M1 over 2.1.8. The only thing missing might be some blocks handling etc. Now, I'm not against adding binary releases for 2.1.x *but* then someone has to do it - the build system has to be updated, we have to think about providing two binary releases one for jdk 1.3 one for jdk 1.4 and so on. If someone does the work on the build system, I'm happy to do the binary release then :) Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG http://www.s-und-n.de http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/
