On Oct 17, 2011, at 1:20 AM, Shawn Jiang wrote:

> 
> Should we name this release to 3.0-beta-1  just like what openejb did for 
> 4.0-beta-1 ?     thoughts ?

If we'd like, that's fine. But, don't know that it's required... Could always 
have a beta, followed by beta-2... Or is there some ordering problem, that I'm 
not realizing?

--kevan

Reply via email to