On Feb 9, 2004, at 1:48 AM, Patrick Lightbody wrote:
I think the right thing to do, as Hani has said, is to _maintain_ 1.x.
By maintain, I would assume this means continuing to provide support,
documentation, bug fixes, and minor enhancements. It is important that
any chance in 1.x is brought to the 2.0 developer's attention so that
we
can make the user experience of migrating from 1.x to 2.0 as painless
as
possible.
Well, we're not ruling out major new features (perhaps even borrowing
from 2.0 if there's enough demand for it). The goal is different from
2.0 though, which is why both branches are alive and well. Think of 1.x
users as conservative old-fashioned people, who aren't huge fans of
change, and are much happier without having to spend a lot of time
sending emails to find out why feature X changed, etc etc.
However, I want to make it clear that, for the sake of users like
Wayland that are seeing a bit of an identity crisis, WebWork 2.x is
where all major enhancements and features will be built. It would be
irresponsible to both the 1.x and 2.x users to let the branches
continue
to diverge any more than they already have.
Hopefully they won't diverge. 1.x definitely isn't on life support mode
either. I (on a personal level) will certainly not recommend people use
ww2, and will explain my (heavily biased) reasoning.
-------------------------------------------------------
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
