I though more about it and considering that we had some APIs change I'm
doing a
+1 to 1.4.0
On 5/4/15 12:37, Rafael Benevides wrote:
I'm ok with either 1.3.1 or 1.4.0.
On 5/4/15 12:14, Jason Porter wrote:
+1
On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Gerhard Petracek
<gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
wrote:
finally this mail arrived twice...
in the other thread we already have 3x +1 for v1.4.0 -> i'll add your
opinions their once i send the conclusion.
regards,
gerhard
2015-05-02 23:27 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
Agreed looks like a 1.3.1 to me.
On Sat, May 2, 2015, 17:09 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Yep didnt see sthg justifying an upgrade for me. What would
justify it
for
a user - ie not for us.
Le 2 mai 2015 23:03, "Gerhard Petracek"
<gerhard.petra...@gmail.com>
a
écrit :
@romain:
see e.g.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12312820&version=12327249
regards,
gerhard
2015-05-02 22:48 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com
:
Hi Gerhard, can you highlight some new features? Not sure proxy
module
is
enough by itself so would be +0 ATM for me.
hi @ all,
if there are no objections, i'll change the version number to 1.4.0
before< the next release.
reasons:
- the release will contain a new module (the proxy-module)
- we added several new features
regards,
gerhard
