Done.
I created a "1.x" version.
-dain
On Oct 27, 2005, at 7:13 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
I just want to be sure we have a reasonable chance of reviewing
what Matt (or others) is doing. Maybe it's just me, but I don't
think this process has worked very well in the past.
If we end up with a reasonable set of Jira versions (1.0, 1.1, and
1.x seem fine -- "not for 1.0" wasn't a literal suggestion) and a
reasonable period of time to review the issues in each version, I'm
all for it.
--kevan
On 10/26/05, John Sisson < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I agree with
Matt & Bruce.
Have a 1.1 and 1.x and place issues to be done soon after 1.0 in
1.1 and
issues to be done in the long term 1.x.
John
Bruce Snyder wrote:
> On 10/26/05, Matt Hogstrom < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>I'd prefer to move them to 1.x or 1.1 and make the ones for 1.0
just 1.0.
>
>
> I agree with Matt. I don't see the point to a not 1.0 bucket. IMO,
> 1.0, 1.1, 1.x is all we need right now.
>
> Bruce
> --
> perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D
\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> );'
>
> The Castor Project
> http://www.castor.org/
>
> Apache Geronimo
> http://geronimo.apache.org/
>
