I've been working on some extensions to Xsd2Jibx and the core JiBX code that support using abstract <mapping>s as the equivalent of schema types. This doesn't allow everything I'd like to support, but at least gives a basic level of support that looks pretty usable (and which can be generated by Xsd2Jibx). I'm also planning to clean up as many of the beta 3c bugs over the next couple of weeks as possible.

At that point I'm considering making the new release 1.0 RC1, and officially making what had been beta 4 the new first beta for JiBX 2.0. Once people have had a chance to test the RC1 release I'll then go ahead and make it the official first production release of JiBX.

This is largely due to the magnitude of the changes I'm including in beta 4, which have grown over time to include an increasing number of user-visible changes. I'm not completely happy with making beta 3c the basis for a production release, since as I've said before there are some problems I have no intention of resolving in the beta 3c codebase. But I think the quality of the code is good enough to justify a production release label, since even though you can construct some bindings which do not work as expected these generally result in clear-cut failures rather than subtle problems which will only show up in deployed systems.

How do you, as users of JiBX, feel about this? If I get a significant number of objections to this approach I'll stick with the old plan of pushing through the megachanges in beta 4.

 - Dennis


------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ jibx-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jibx-users

Reply via email to