+1

On 7/23/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> /branches
> /branches/1_1_6
> /branches/1_2_1
> /tags
> /tags/1_1_2
> /tags/1_1_3
> /tags/1_1_4
> /tags/1_1_5
> /tags/1_2_0
> /tags/1_2_1
> /1_1_x          <--- the trunk for JSF 1.1 development
> /1_2_x          <--- the trunk for JSF 1.2 development

I like that "tomcat style".

-M

>
> The great advantage: We can do this step by step without breaking
> anything. All we need to do is point the externals in the "current"
> project to the right trunk folder. We even can do the restructuring
> first and point the externals to the corresponding "1_1_x" trunks and
> in a second step switch "current" to the "1_2_x" trunks without a need
> to restructure again.
> "
>
> WDYT?
>
> --Manfred
>
>
>
> On 7/20/07, Paul Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I do not like the idea of "current (symlink to jsf1.2)".  To me JSF
1.1
> > and 1.2 are two products and should be treated as such.
> >
> > Paul Spencer
> >
> > Andrew Robinson wrote:
> > > Not to be too anal, but would:
> > >
> > > current (symlink to jsf1.2)
> > > jsf1.1
> > > jsf1.2
> > >
> > > Be a little more "tidy"?
> > >
> > > It should also consider the web site right? Right now, it only shows
> > > the current/trunk branch. Perhaps the site should be versioned as
> > > well. Example using tomahawk:
> > >
> > > myfaces.apache.org/tomahawk/current (symlink to 1.2)
> > > myfaces.apache.org/tomahawk/1.2
> > > myfaces.apache.org/tomahawk/1.1
> > >
> > > On 7/20/07, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > "Why not":  how many users are ready to make the jump to
> > >> > JSF 1.2?  Many of our users, Tomahawk, Trinidad, Tobago, are
> > >> > on JSP 2.0 or earlier.
> > >>
> > >> Yeah, but we're just making 1.2 the trunk, not forcing people to
use 1.2.
> > >>
> > >> Again two active branches current11 and current12 sounds good to
me,
> > >> where
> > >> current12 has the trunks
> > >>
> > >> Cagatay
> > >>
> > >> On 7/20/07, Matt Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > +1 (non-binding)
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On 7/20/07, Adam Winer < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > > "Why not":  how many users are ready to make the jump to
> > >> > > JSF 1.2?  Many of our users, Tomahawk, Trinidad, Tobago, are
> > >> > > on JSP 2.0 or earlier.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > It'd make my life way easier if the Trinidad trunk were 1.2,
> > >> > > definitely, I just doubt that would hold true for the users.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Just for starters, what about the committers?  How many
> > >> > > of us can stick to 1.2?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -- Adam
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On 7/20/07, Cagatay Civici < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > > > About subprojects, I think the case is same for them, if we
make
> > >> 1.2
> > >> the
> > >> > > > trunk for api, why not set 1.2 branches of subprojects as
trunks
> > >> too?
> > >> Also
> > >> > > > after doing it, we may need to reconfigure current and
current12
> > >> too.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On 7/19/07, Paul Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > > > > Assuming MyFaces 1.1.7 is released so the SVN configuration
in
> > >> the
> > >> POM
> > >> > > > > of next version of MyFaces will be correct.  Otherwise
people,
> > >> including
> > >> > > > > Continuum, who are using 1.1.7-SNAPSHOT from the repository
> > >> will be
> > >> in
> > >> > > > > for a very big surprise.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Qualified +1 otherwise -0 for the above reason
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Although I missed the discussion, my preference would be
for a
> > >> MyFaces
> > >> > > > > 1.1 and 1.2 trunk/branch since both are active products.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Paul Spencer
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > >> > > > > > Hi,
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > this is a vote for making the JSF 1.2 efforts by our
group to
> > >> become
> > >> > > > > > the current trunk.
> > >> > > > > > Currently the JSF 1.2-work lives on a branch (
> > >> 1.2.1-SNAPSHOT is
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > > current version).
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Please cast your vote
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------
> > >> > > > > > [ ] +1 for moving the myfaces 1.2.x to trunk
> > >> > > > > > [ ] +0
> > >> > > > > > [ ] -1 and why..............
> > >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > -M
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.irian.at
> Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting,
> Development and Courses in English and
> German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>


--
Matthias Wessendorf

further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org




--
Grant Smith

Reply via email to