Paul Spencer wrote: >I agree with Jon, we should call the next release 1.3-b1. Along those >line, we should limit enhancement between the beta and the release of >1.3 to those that will NOT break user developed portlets. If this means >releasing 1.3 sooner and postponing the implementation of the new >Portlet API to 1.4, I would support that decision. > I am +1 on this one also.
We have a product that depends on jetspeed, and I would like to have a stable point to have simpler release cycle, so I'm not continuously moving code between undocumented, unreleased versions of turbine and jetspeed. I think PortletAPI work missing is enough to give a thought to freezing API in 1.3, release, and then have a extended 1.4 release cycle with the new API. > > >Paul Spencer > >Jon Stevens wrote: > >>on 10/13/01 2:13 PM, "David Sean Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>If we can fix all of these bugs and implement the essential features, the >>>quality, in my opinion, will be good enough to drop the alpha. >>> >>If that happens, then the next release would be beta. :-) >> >>-jon >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
