On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:54:35 -0700, Craig McClanahan wrote: > I don't care if we go with implicit alpha ratings versus no rating > at all -- indeed that probably makes more sense. I do care if, for > example, I can go create a "Struts-Faces Integration Library 1.0.1" > release (even if it's labelled as alpha quality) with zero input > from the other committers. That doesn't seem like something we > want to encourage.
I don't have a problem with that. Especially if the milestone is plainly labeled "_ALPHA". We've all had our chance: each and every time a commit was made. People are already suppose to announce their short-term plans, as we did for Struts 1.2.5. If people have anything to say before something is rolled, that's the time. If you roll it, then we can vote on it. And we can be voting on something that corresponds to an unambiguous SVN tag, that we would consider immutable. The only practical difference seems to be whether we label the "test build" with a milestone-number/repository-tag or not. I strongly prefer using unambiguous, immutable milestone tags for whatever distribution we're testing. -T. On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:54:35 -0700, Craig McClanahan wrote: > On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:39:44 -0700, Martin Cooper > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 01:28:29 -0400, Ted Husted >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 20:47:56 -0700, Martin Cooper wrote: >>> >>>> When we first started discussing changes to the way we build >>>> and release Struts, the model that was proposed was the >>>> Tomcat model, and that is still the model I would like to see >>>> us follow, terminology and all. >>>> >>> >>> I believe the initial suggestion, way back when, was to use the >>> HTTPD protocol, which people then mentioned was like the Tomcat >>> protocol. >>> >> >> I don't believe that's correct. Craig brought up the topic, from >> his experience with Tomcat, and specifically suggested that we do >> things the way Tomcat was doing them. >> > > I did indeed propose the Tomcat model, or at least the Tomcat model > that I understood to be working at the time. More recently, it > looks like there's an informal step of tacit agreement on the dev > list that a new release should be created, with an implicit alpha > quality rating. > > I don't care if we go with implicit alpha ratings versus no rating > at all -- indeed that probably makes more sense. I do care if, for > example, I can go create a "Struts-Faces Integration Library 1.0.1" > release (even if it's labelled as alpha quality) with zero input > from the other committers. That doesn't seem like something we > want to encourage. > > >> -- >> Martin Cooper >> > Craig > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For > additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
