Hi, +1 for the proposal
BR Eric 2013/4/26 Maruan Sahyoun <sahy...@fileaffairs.de> > Hi Andreas, > > sound like you are having a very enjoyable time. > > +1 for the proposal > > Maruan Sahyoun > > Am 26.04.2013 um 07:36 schrieb Andreas Lehmkühler <andr...@lehmi.de>: > > > Hi, > > > > sorry for answering that late but my time is limited at present due to > > an ongoing family event. :-) > > > > There were more or less different opinions about the future layout of > > our svn repo, but I guess there is a way everybody could agree to. > > > > What do you think about the following proposal: > > > > - use the current trunk for the ongoing development of 2.0.0 > > - use indivual branches for bigger changes in the trunk, as Guillaume > > did when refactoring xmpbox > > - use the current 1.8-branch [1] for bugfix-releases, as I did when > > releasing 1.8.1 > > - a possible 1.9-branch could be created using the 1.8-branch if > > necessary > > > > Is this something everybody can agree to? > > > > BR > > Andreas Lehmkühler > > > > [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/pdfbox/branches/1.8/ > > > > > > Am 18.04.13 21:11, schrieb Andreas Lehmkuehler: > >> Hi, > >> > >> what is our next target after releasing 1.8.0 and 1.8.1? > >> > >> We already started some discussions about that topic, but I'd like to > have > >> clarification. Is it time to go for a 2.0 version? If we agree to that > >> goal, > >> how should we proceed? Should we branch or simply use the trunk? > >> > >> I'd prefer to continue using the trunk. We are still able to release > >> bugfix versions using the 1.8-branch. Even a new 1.9 feature release > >> should be possible by branching the 1.8-branch. > >> > >> WDYT? > >> > >> BR > >> Andreas Lehmkühler > > > > > >
