+1 with Reinhard and Romain.

Le jeu. 30 avr. 2015 à 11:10, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> a
écrit :

> 2015-04-30 11:02 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>:
>
> > I’d rather stay with 1.5.1.
> >
> > Yes I did lots of changes, but those changes only affect SPI interfaces
> > which already got marked as deprecated since a long time. Also those
> > changes do _not_ affect any end users. They just affect integration. And
> > there is no single released server out there which already uses 1.5.0. So
> > we are pretty free to change this still as long as we
> >
> >
> 1.5.0 is released even if not integrated in a released server so too late.
> This is the more nasty changes since they are invisible but impacting (a
> bit like adding sleep(15000) in a method ;)).
>
>
> > a.) make sure we drop a release soon (which I will)
> > b.) make sure TomEE still runs. And I will make sure that happens as
> well.
> >
> > For me the 1.5.0 release was kind of ‚pre release‘ to make sure we get
> > feedback. Again: my changes do _not_ affect any users.
> >
> >
> We should have tagged it pre/alpha/beta/something explicit.
>
> That said this is wrong since you use the session (even if you dont want to
> accept it). To be concrete, suppose the session is clustered with hazelcast
> using a custom serializer, what happens? can bet in some cases it will not
> run anymore where before it was fine.
>
>
> > Any further ideas and opinion?
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> > > Am 30.04.2015 um 09:30 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> [email protected]
> > >:
> > >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > Mark did a lot of rework on conversation scope handling.
> > >
> > > I would like to go for 1.6.x as base version because of it instead of
> > 1.5.1.
> > >
> > > Any objection?
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> > > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to