On 13/01/14 18:27, Andrea Aime wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Andrea Aime
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>     On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies
>     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     wrote:
>         -0 for upgrade for 2.5.x, unless there is compelling argument
>         for it. We all know how enthusiastic users are when it comes to
>         testing beta releases; it would be a shame to spring a largely
>         untested GWC on the stable branch. I think we are a bit too
>         close to beta.
>     I believe we should also check with the GWC devs about how much
>     changed since 1.5.0, I have the impression not much happened
> Verified, not much indeed:
> https://github.com/GeoWebCache/geowebcache/compare/1.5.0...master
>
> Personally, I'd revert the version number changes, call it 1.5.1, and
> use in for 2.5-beta

Hmm, yes, it looks more like a maintenance branch, with a few bug fixes 
and small features. I am warming to your proposal: +0

Kind regards,

-- 
Ben Caradoc-Davies <[email protected]>
Software Engineer
CSIRO Earth Science and Resource Engineering
Australian Resources Research Centre

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. 
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Reply via email to