Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
How about moving the "new" code (HEAD) to a separate (xml-fop2) CVS project to clarify things, and maybe name the new version "fop 2" instead of 1.0x?I believe it doesn't matter actually how to version HEAD or how it's organized within cvs, what does matter is a dissipation of developers and contributors efforts. Maintenance branch, as you correctly noted, is in production at many sites therefore making it a project on its own will lead to a strengthening of its meaning and this way we'll encourage many existing and future contributors to work on it, instead of helping us to get HEAD up.
Although the current version is 0.20.x, it *is* used in production at a number of sites, so going directly to version 2.x for a mostly new codebase makes sense IMHO.
--
Oleg Tkachenko
eXperanto team
Multiconn Technologies, Israel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
