On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 02:31:19PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Michael Koch wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 12:33:45PM +0200, Torsten Werner wrote: > >> The discussion is probably over because jetty 6.1.19-1 has been > >> accepted into experimental. But we can still call the next major > >> version jetty7. > > > > As long as jetty 6.x is not in unstable nothing is decided. Its still > > possible to do jetty 5.x uploads to unstable and upload jetty6 6.x to > > unstable too. > > OK, let me know what your final decision is on how it will be named once > it reaches unstable. It will affect the name of the package I'll soon > upload to Ubuntu to provide Jetty6 libraries to Eucalyptus. It will > still make a much simpler sync in the future if it were called jetty6, > but it's still your decision :)
Personally I see the is as another reason to name it jetty6 as collaboration is important for us. Even when I dont use Ubuntu myself I think we should collaborate as much as possible to manage our developer resources better. I doesn't make sense to make the life of our developers more hard then it already is. Cheers, Michael _______________________________________________ pkg-java-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers
