Exactly. I'd like to start a vote as soon as a couple of bugs/design issues are fixed and migration guide becomds available.
Cheers, Trustin On Dec 15, 2007 6:53 AM, Brian McCallister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If the committers are recommending using trunk, that suggests it is > time for a release. > > Seriously. > > -Brian > > > On Dec 14, 2007, at 1:35 PM, Mike Heath wrote: > > > mclovis wrote: > >> mclovis wrote: > >>> We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current > >>> design. Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things > >>> somewhat > >>> by switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring > >>> phase. That > >>> being said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have > >>> promised > >>> GA by summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for > >>> production > >>> quality and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to > >>> M2. If > >>> we are going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the > >>> time > >>> for us. I am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1 > >>> to Mina2 > >>> features as well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated. > >>> > >> > >> If there are any code committers following this thread any > >> insights from > >> them would also be appreciated. > > > > I'm a committer on MINA and I would recommend using MINA TRUNK for new > > projects. There are a lot of really nice improvements to MINA TRUNK > > in > > terms of both performance and a better API. > > > > I'm using MINA TRUNK on a few projects right now. These projects are > > still in development so changes to MINA haven't been much of an issue. > > > > We would also like to get as much feedback before cutting a MINA 2.0 > > release so the more people using MINA TRUNK the better. > > > > -Mike > > -- what we call human nature is actually human habit -- http://gleamynode.net/ -- PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
