There's a demand for 1.x to keep being maintained. A not insignificant number of people use this in production environments and work with it on a daily basis (I suspect more than ww2 currently). Many of these people are reluctant to migrate to ww2 (for now at least).
If/when at some point in the future we (and by we, I meant some majority of ww1 users) feel that ww2 is ready for prime time, 'we' might migrate.
On Feb 9, 2004, at 12:46 AM, Wayland Chan wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to ask the core team what their intentions are for the webwork platform. It confuses me greatly
that we have two distinctly different frameworks, maintained by two completely differently teams, using
essentially the same name, and basically doing the same thing.
Do you guys intend on merging the two versions into one product?
If not, then let's just call it as it is and rename the WW2 to something else.
Wayland Chan email: wchanATtrekspaceDOTcom
---------------------------------------------------------- Get your free email account from http://www.trekspace.com Your Internet Virtual Desktop!
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
