Antonio Petrelli wrote:
2007/2/6, David H. DeWolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:The test build of Tiles 2.0.0 has been tagged and is now available. No determination as to the quality ('alpha,' 'beta,' or 'GA') of Tiles 2.0.0 has been made, and at this time it is simply a "test build". We welcome any comments you may have, and will take all feedback into account if a quality vote is called for this build.Two notes: * http://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/TILES-5 is still open, and it has the "fix for" tag pointing to the 2.0.0 version, is it ok?
Because the site is "released" separately, I think it is, but others may not. The only thing left for the issues is that I want to knock off if finalizing the quickstart. I plan to do that before the vote finishes and bits get published.
* Resolution http://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/TILES-103 will change JSP tags names and XML elements substantially. If we release an alpha version, I think it is ok, though we will have some problems telling the alpha-version users to change their JSP and XML files completely (just a matter of a search-and-replace, I suppose).
IMHO that's one of the main reasons we'll stick at ALPHA. My guess is that these aren't the only refactorings we'll want to do. For me, alpha basically means, "here our first attempt, tell us what you think but don't get too attached". I'll try to put some verbiage together for the website to that extent - explaining that significant refactoring should be expected in an alpha version (updated TILES-5).
Thoughts?
One more thing I realized this morning. We don't really have any distributions :), we only have maven jars. I'm personally ok with this for 2.0.0 (let's create a zip of the published jars along with the appropriate LICENSE files and call it done), but I have a feeling that others may not be. Thoughts?
David
Antonio
