Dave wrote: > On 3/1/07, Allen Gilliland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip] > > Three reasons: > - A branch is additional work > - We're all working on the same thing, i.e. 4.0 > - I'm dedicated to actively maintaining the JPA back-end and keeping > it in sync with anything Allen or Elias or anybody else does, > including new manager interfaces and methods. > > That said, I'm not totally opposed to a branch, but I think we need to > coordinate, sync-up and perhaps better define 4.0 and the time frame. > Maybe we need one, maybe we don't. > > I thought that consensus was that Roller 4.0 is these things: > - New backend > - Start of Struts2 migration > - Introduce requirement for JDK 5 > - Other features Allen wants? > And Allen and I both wanted to have some stability by late March. I'm not sure about this consensus, but that's probably because I wasn't around. I see a 4.0 proposal, but I didn't think that Roller 4.0 was closed for new proposals. I'm trying to sync up with 4.0 work we did for Lotus Connections and it wasn't until now that I'm ready to write proposals and work on them together with the community. However, a month for all that? It seems crazy to me to think that we'll replace the UI, back-end, new Java version in a month. > > I'm guessing Elias could get his features in pretty quicky and late I'd hope that anything I want to do will not slow you down. But I don't want to wait til 4.1. Roller is really fast at moving versions, but slower at releasing them, therefore I need to catch up with your development schedule not your release schedule. > March could still work, but what about JPA stability and what about > iBatis vs. JPA. Do we pick JPA over iBatis just because iBatis isn't > ready by arbitrary date X? I'd hope not. > > My primary goal is having a stable JPA implementation by late March. > I'm willing to be flexible on pretty much everything else. > > Whats the new consensus? What do you guys need and by when? I'm not sure why the topic changed into time frames. What I think Allen and I were asking was where to do the work? For example I don't know what you are doing with JPA (e.g. I thought you were ripping everything out to do a straight JPA, else we are just continuing with our multiple back-end story). If so, I didn't want to be working with a branch that had all of that going. I have 2 proposals, plus 3 more coming (Reverse Proxy, Lucene Search revamping and continue discussing language detection). Everything else is little bug fixes here and there. All of those proposals can be worked in w/o a need of a major branch (the worse would be to break search for a few days or such). If 4.0 branch is stable enough, then I got my answer: work on branch 4.0 . I don't want to force you to work on a branch unless it's counter productive to the rest of us. -Elias > > - Dave >
