Re: Status of 2.3 Release

2006-12-02 Thread Brandon Goodin
I think that would be good (of course) :D. Brandon On 12/1/06, Clinton Begin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's a great point. I've had similar discussions. How about this: Let's do the vote for 2.2. GA right now. Assuming it passes (I don't see why not considering how long it's been out),

Re: Status of 2.3 Release

2006-12-02 Thread Jeff Butler
I think it's a good idea too. I could sign the 2.2.0 zip and publish it to the mirrors. I want to add the 2.2 PDF docs to it first though. Then everything for the last DAO release (including docs) would be in one place. Sound like a plan? Jeff On 12/2/06, Brandon Goodin [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Re: Status of 2.3 Release

2006-12-02 Thread Jeff Butler
I've signed and published 2.2.0 on the mirrors, and updated the downloads page accordingly. You'll see it after the next site referesh. I left it marked as beta because I wasn't sure if our vote was final or not. If we're ready to go GA, we should probably wait until at least tomorrow to make

Re: Status of 2.3 Release

2006-12-01 Thread Jeff Butler
We discussed this some weeks ago. IIRC, Clinton wanted to do a new release rather than voting for GA on 2.2. Jeff Butler On 12/1/06, Brandon Goodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curious why we are superceding 2.2 wit 2.3? 2.2 has been available for some time and contains several bug fixes over

Re: Status of 2.3 Release

2006-12-01 Thread Clinton Begin
To clarify, what I suggested a week or so ago was: We can vote for GA anytime, even after another release makes it to GA. The beta, alpha, GA status is always flexible. We could vote for GA on 2.2. right now actually. So a little closer to what Brandon is suggesting. However, I'm more

Re: Status of 2.3 Release

2006-12-01 Thread Clinton Begin
My vote is to leave it the way it is. My conservative, pragmatic and adventurous sides are all satisfied by having a single GA release as well as the latest Beta release available for download. 2.2 is available in the past releases if people want it. Cheers, Clinton On 12/1/06, Jeff Butler

Re: Status of 2.3 Release

2006-12-01 Thread Brandon Goodin
I'm fine with pushing 2.3. But, I had a conversation on the list with someone who feared upgrading to 2.2 because it wasn't GA. This was, apparently, a company policy. They need a feature that is available in 2.2but will not upgrade because it is not GA. If we do not make 2.2 GA then their

Re: Status of 2.3 Release

2006-12-01 Thread Clinton Begin
That's a great point. I've had similar discussions. How about this: Let's do the vote for 2.2. GA right now. Assuming it passes (I don't see why not considering how long it's been out), we update 2.1.7 to 2.2 on the website by Monday. Then, next Friday (7 days) we start the vote for 2.3 GA

Re: Status of 2.3 Release

2006-11-30 Thread Clinton Begin
Awesome stuff Jeff. Thanks for all your hard work. Clinton On 11/30/06, Jeff Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, I have everything built for 2.3, and have everything signed and checksummed. Unfortunately, there are permission problems in the .../dist directories, so I'm stuck right