Scott, There have been breaking changes made in CVS since the previous beta, and I cannot rule out further breaking changes between now and the final release of 1.2. Changing the 3rd part of the version number is sufficient to support side-by-side versioning.
As you have a production system you need to look vary carefully at any changes you make, and need to justify and test any dependant library changes. If log4net beta8 is working for you then you may not want to upgrade to this release, it may make more sense to wait for a finalised 1.2 release. Nicko > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Hanselman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 21 February 2005 18:01 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [POLL] New Release 1.2.9 Beta > > At my company, we have 1.2.0b8 in production, and have > written appenders and formatters of our own. > > I understand (correct me if I'm wrong) that interfaces have > changed, and that existing appenders won't work? I am > assuming this because I had to recompile 1.2.0b8 to make a > method virtual to write a formatter. > > All that said, shouldn't the version number be 1.3 to express > the breaking changes? > > Scott Hanselman - Corillian Corp > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------- > Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Henry Padilla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Sent: Mon Feb 21 07:40:45 2005 > Subject: RE: [POLL] New Release 1.2.9 Beta > > That sounds good to me. I approve. > > Tom Padilla > > > >From: "Nicko Cadell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: "Log4NET Dev" <[email protected]> > >To: "Log4NET Dev" <[email protected]> > >Subject: [POLL] New Release 1.2.9 Beta > >Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 18:42:57 -0000 > > > >Hi all, > > > >It has been rather a long time since the last beta release > of log4net, > >and an even long time since the last full release. I think > it is time > >to focus on finalising the 1.2 release and particularly that means > >focusing on quality. > > > >As I first step I think that we should produce an up to date > snapshot > >release from the current CVS head. The CVS code and > documentation are > >in good shape at the moment. > > > >Would you approve such a release? > > > >Assuming log4net 1.2.9 Beta is approved, I will petition the PMC and > >the incubator for their (required) approvals. > > > >Following this release I propose that we should freeze feature > >development and concentrate on quality. Before the 1.2 final release > >there will be one (or more, as required) release candidates. > > > >Nicko > > > >---- > >Nicko Cadell > >log4net dev > > > > > > >
