Am Do, den 05.08.2004 schrieb Danny Mui um 1:17:
> The perf branch should still be a target to convert to, but I agree that
> things are stagnating and drifting too far apart.
It seems we have consensus on these items:
1. From the HEAD fork a new "performance branch", say, HSSF_PERF,
containing the current unstable HSSF changes. Advantages:
- We have only stable modules in the HEAD, which should be a must in the
future. Stable means that the code compiles, that there are sufficient
test cases, and that the test cases don't fail.
- The performance development could continue in the HSSF_PERF branch
without any time pressures. The changes can be merged into the HEAD when
they are finished. Whether that merging is easy or not and whether any
HSSF changes that are unrelated to the performance thing have to be done
to both HEAD and HSSF_PERF, I cannot decide.
2. Copy HSSF from the REL_2_BRANCH to the HEAD.
3. Make a HEAD-based release fairly soon.
Ideally the HEAD-based release would contain Glen's latest changes.
However, if 1. and 2. take too long it would be better to make a 2.5.1
immediately and a 2.6 release later (but not too late).
Do we formally need to vote on this? Are there any other issues?
Best regards
Rainer Klute
Rainer Klute IT-Consulting GmbH
Dipl.-Inform.
Rainer Klute E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
K�rner Grund 24 Telefon: +49 172 2324824
D-44143 Dortmund Telefax: +49 231 5349423
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
