If a simple svn merge makes the back port happen then why not to have a tight 1.0? This is mostly a matter of dependencies and making sure the sar contents are correct.
Alex On 3/12/07, Aron Sogor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I see little reason to back port if we have a bigger better thing working. Aron Alex Karasulu wrote: > > > On 3/12/07, *Aron Sogor* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > wrote: > > > I am working on a project called Meldware at buni.org > <http://buni.org>. I would like to > expose our AddressBook to TBird/Evolution using LDAP. > > I would like to resurrect your simple .sar deployment in JBOSS, > and make > it part of your the DS offering. How stable is the 1.5 line, or > better > done in 1.0x line? > > > Aron to answer your question 1.5 is stable and usable with the dynamic > schema feature > and the almost operational replication capabilities. Note however > that this (trunk) is our > feature introduction branch. We use odd minor numbers to denote > feature introduction branches > as opposed to bug fix branches. > > 1.5.0 should be released sometime soon and it's a great time for us to > make sure that the sar > module actually works. This would be the place to make your changes. > We could back port > your fixes to the sar module to the 1.0 branch as well. > > After talking with Alex, what is everybody's feel, > interest to collaborate? > > > > Thoughts? > > Alex
