We've never maintained a branch for a release before, I don't think we have the resources. I really can't see that we have enough time to maintain two different versions of James, though the principle is reasonable of itself. Its my view that we should tag the release, and address bug fixes in the next release cycle.
d. > -----Original Message----- > From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 12 October 2002 23:30 > To: James Developers List > Subject: RE: [PATCH] Removing Scheduler dependency, refactoring service > code > > > > There is no reason to fork the code if its going to evolve. > > The reason for forking is simply to be able to put out fixes to > the 2.1 code > based after we make major API changes. If you have an alternative that > permits both, great. > > --- Noel > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
