David Sean Taylor wrote: > Martin, > > Well Im not sure if I want tons of patches right now :) > We are just about it to put out a release, and tons of patches sounds very > destabilizing. > What do we gain? > Bug fixes? > The jar must be substantially smaller. > I imagine there must be lots of redundant and unused code between > Torque/Turbine etc.. > Im just not sure if this is worth holding up a release for. Any others have > thoughts on this?
ok, i'll keep my hands from jetspeed ;-) and will prepare the turbine 2.2-b2 release now ... maybe we can discuss the movement to turbine 2.2 after your release martin > > David > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Martin Poeschl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 5:26 AM > Subject: jetspeed and turbine 2.2 > > > >>i'm working on a turbine 2.2 release (b2 planned for today .. maybe > > tomorrow ;-) > >>there are some big changes: >> >>the coupled torque has been removed >>the api of the decoupled torque changed (using List instead of Vector) >> >>so i thought it would be godd to see how much work it is to move an app > > like jetspeed to 2.2 > >>but i don't get it how the build for jetspeed should work?? >>are you using maven?? or is the maven build only started?? >>why do you generate the om classes to the src tree?? shouldn't it be > > target/src?? > >>i would like to help to make the maven build work (as it should) and move > > to turbine 2.2 > >>so you can grant cvs access to me (i can work in a branch if you like) or > > you'll get tons of patches > >> during the next days ;-) >> >>martin >> >> >>-- >>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]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
