Now wait a minute - what happened to our alpha releases? In a more traditional
scheme, you would have "2.0 alpha" and "2.0 alpha 1", which could contain
basically anything you want. The clear alpha designation indicates that big
changes are in progress and this is more of a milestone release to encourage
development contributions.
As we are going with this Tomcat/HTTPD-style system, I was under the impression
that "2.0 alpha" would become "2.0.0 quality alpha" and could still contain
anything we want. Therefore, 2.0.0 and 2.0.1 could have radically different
content because both were judged alpha quality.
Either we allow anything we want, including a new api, in the 2.0.x releases
until a beta is declared, or we should move back to a more familiar release
naming system. Development milestones are important and they shouldn't be
eliminated.
Don
Ted Husted wrote:
On 7/23/06, Bob Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If we want to tag now, the new API will have to wait for 3.0.
I think we are reaching the point where if we still want to make
"large changes" for 2.0, we need to make them now, or make them in
2.1. AFAIC, we can open 2.1 as soon as we have a stable 2.0
distribution. (Or as soon as someone volunteers to port the patches.)
But, with my release manager hat on, I am saying that any "large
changes" slated for 2.0.x have to be committed by July 31, or be
postponed.
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
