On 1/23/07, Greg Reddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/23/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am pretty fine with a 1.0.5 instead of 1.0.4.1 ;)
Me too :-)
<snip/>
I definitely understand the desire for the fix to be available (and
released). But I am even more interested in the process. Framework
releases are coarser granularity and need more cycles, but provide a
nice one-stop shop for all artifacts that work together. Modules are a
finer granularity, and we can perhaps be more nimble releasing them,
but we haven't released them separately.
I was really looking for a discussion whether we want to go the latter
route here, because that will entail a new set of procedural bits to
be worked out (such as whether the shale-view-fix.jar is made
available separately, what is its version number etc.).
Going for a 1.0.5 without such a discussion is jumping the gun, IMO.
Its possible we will have other comparable scenarios down the road. So
lets pause and use this to create a process which will last Shale a
lifetime, or half.
-Rahul
Greg
