Hi, Last Monday I asked about "objections against the PocEdmAnnotationExtension feature merge into the master branch² (see mail below). Based on the fact that nobody wrote any objections against it I start with the merge tomorrow.
As short conclusion about the feature and the merge: The feature/extension has its own (maven) sub modules and only additions in the ³api-annotations² module so there should be no regressions to existing applications. The only change is in the JPA processor which should be extended to support the additions in the ³api-annotations² so that currently redundant (java) annotations can be removed in a further release. For more information see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OLINGO-32 Kind regards, Michael From: SAP SAP <[email protected]> Reply-To: <[email protected]> Date: Monday 2 December 2013 08:38 To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Feature: Annotation for EDM definition Hi, regarding to the Annotations for EDM definition (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OLINGO-32) I have two question. First WDYT should the "odata-api" and the "odata-api-annotation² decoupled (no dependency between them)? See discussion in comments here[1] and here[2]. Second I would prefer to merge the PocEdmAnnotationExtension feature branch into the master branch and include it into the next (1.1.0) release. Are there any objections against this? Kind regards, Michael [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OLINGO-32?focusedCommentId=13835966&pa ge=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment- 13835966 [2]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OLINGO-32?focusedCommentId=13836313&pa ge=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment- 13836313
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
