On 06/02/2008, Alin Dreghiciu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well Pax Runner is 1.0 ready from 0.5.1. But in this case shouldn't we > go for 1.0 also for the parts that makes up Pax Runner as the new Pax > URL (this for sure can go 1.0 if Pax runner goes 1.0). But what about > Base and Pax Swissbox?
yes, I think we should start moving those to at least an RC Also maybe is worth going 1.0 only when we have the infrastructure for > Maven central repo deployment in place. and also ensure the final 1.0 poms are 'clean' from a maven perspective (ie. don't have the OPS4J repository entries, etc.) afaik we can start putting out RCs before worrying about this... Alin > > On Feb 6, 2008 12:38 PM, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Feb 6, 2008 11:32 AM, Stuart McCulloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > On 05/02/2008, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Are there anything in Pax Runner that makes us to hesitate a 1.0 > > > > release? I think it is one of the most important pieces in the OSGi > > > > effort here at OPS4J, and we should signal its maturity with a GA > > > > release. WDYT? -- Niclas. > > > > > > > > > Looking at the issues list there doesn't seem to be any > > > show-stoppers, so +1 for making the next release 1.0 > > > > > > We should probably put out a release candidate first to > > > get feedback, as from experience it seems people only > > > start reporting issues just before you do a release ;) > > > > Agree. So, we aim for a 1.0-RC1 as soon as possible. > > > > Alin, any comments? > > > > Cheers > > Niclas > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > general mailing list > > general@lists.ops4j.org > > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general > > > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > general@lists.ops4j.org > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general > -- Cheers, Stuart
_______________________________________________ general mailing list general@lists.ops4j.org http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
