I would suggest keeping the MyFaces core version in
1.1.x range becuse any releses are just bug fixes. New
functionality can only be added when the JSR changes. At
that point should the minor version change.
+1 on releasing JSF 1.2 implementation as 2.0.0
Thus :
JSF 1.1 -> MyFaces 1.x
JSF 1.2 -> MyFaces 2.x
Paul Spencer
Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
we sould do the same for core
next is 1.5.0
and JSF 1.2 stuff should be changed to 2.0.0
On 2/23/07, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
1.5.0 or 1.6.0. One is as good as the other IMO.
You mean 1.6.0 is better because it does not "match" the 1.1.5 of
current core?
I think Martin suggested 1.5.0 because it would be in the style of
Tomcat 5.0.x vs Tomcat 5.5.x, right?
--Manfred
On 2/23/07, Paul Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If the version of Tomahawk is not tied to the version of MyFaces, then
> how about the NEXT version of Tomahawk be 1.6?
>
> This would allow Tomahawk, like Tobago, to be version independently
of MyFaces.
>
> Paul Spencer
>
> Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > slightly too late, but 1.1.5 would have been my option as well.
> >
> > other option: 1.5 - and let tomahawk and impl version numbers get
out of
> > sync.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 2/23/07, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Ok, thanks for your feedback.
> >> Branch 1.1.5 created.
> >>
> >> --Manfred
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2/23/07, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > On 2/23/07, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > > The new tomahawk release number is a trade-off.
> >> > > We must decide between
> >> > > - releasing tomahawk 1.1.4 which is not compatible to core
1.1.4 and
> >> > > therefore might confuse users
> >> > > - skipping tomahawk 1.1.4, stay in sync with core and have a
> >> tomahawk
> >> > > 1.1.5 that is 100% compatible to the current core 1.1.5
> >> >
> >> > +1 for Tomahawk 1.1.5 this time around, which will be
compatible with
> >> > Core 1.1.5.
> >> >
> >> > (There is plenty of information in the archives if anyone asks
"what
> >> > happened" to 1.1.4. As Paul points out, Tomcat skips version
numbers
> >> > in their public release series.)
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Wendy
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
