next is "testing" and prepare a release candidate. by end of next week (if all agree) I can provide a 124 RC so, we have some time to test. If we need more time, no big deal in waiting some more days :-)
-M On Nov 15, 2007 12:48 PM, Jeanne Waldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My vote is still to make 1.2 the trunk, and not have two trunks. > By the way, I created 1.2.4-branch, and did the merge and did a quick > test by following Adam's directions on the wiki page. Matthias, what is > the next step in the process? > > http://wiki.apache.org/myfaces/TrinidadCreating12Branches > > Thanks, > Jeanne > > Andrew Robinson wrote: > > +1 > > > > Getting the ball rolling :) > > > > On 11/15/07, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Vote: > >> Creation of > >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/trinidad/trunk_1.2.x/ > >> > >> Justification: > >> Once again trinidad lacking a trunk for 1.2 is giving me heartburn. > >> I have been making changes to 1.0.5 and to be nice, I wanted to put > >> them into 1.2 as well, but of course there is no home for 1.2.5 yet. > >> Unlike the last time this was brought up, we now have an existing > >> example as an argument to use as a standard: > >> > >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/trunk_1.2.x/ > >> > >> If it is good enough for core, should it not also be good enough for > >> trinidad? > >> > >> Since "https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/trinidad/trunk/"; would > >> remain untouched, this should remove any debates over JSF not being > >> supported. > >> > >> Benefits: > >> 1) 1.2 snapshots possible with continuum > >> 2) 1.2 is kept up to date > >> 3) easier merge during 1.2 release time and hopefully as a result a > >> more stable product > >> > >> -Andrew > >> > > > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
