On Feb 11, 2008 8:20 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Feb 11, 2008, at 12:20 AM, Maarten Bosteels wrote:
>
> > On Feb 11, 2008 7:37 AM, Mike Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> The new logging features in SLF4J and removing IoSessionLogger were
> >> what
> >> was holding
On Feb 11, 2008, at 12:20 AM, Maarten Bosteels wrote:
On Feb 11, 2008 7:37 AM, Mike Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The new logging features in SLF4J and removing IoSessionLogger were
what
was holding up an M1 release. Where do we stand on the logging front
right now?
see my comments o
On Feb 11, 2008 7:37 AM, Mike Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The new logging features in SLF4J and removing IoSessionLogger were what
> was holding up an M1 release. Where do we stand on the logging front
> right now?
see my comments on http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-513
"IoS
The new logging features in SLF4J and removing IoSessionLogger were what
was holding up an M1 release. Where do we stand on the logging front
right now?
-Mike
Maarten Bosteels wrote:
> On Feb 10, 2008 9:05 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 10, 2008, at 11:35 AM, Maarten
2008-02-10 (일), 00:56 +0100, Maarten Bosteels 쓰시길:
> > Sticking to MINA 2.0 overall will be in the best interest of the community
>
> I couldn't agree more. I really see no reason to stick with 1.x
> In fact, I think we should 'release' MINA-2.0-M1 asap.
Yeah, go MINA! :)
Trustin
--
what we cal
Until 2.0 GA we should leave the trunk as is. When we go to GA after some
number of milestones then we can create the 2.0 branch which will only
include bug fixes. Right now the bleeding edge is the trunk. This is where
all new features and API changes occur.
I think we can do milestone release
On Feb 10, 2008 9:05 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Feb 10, 2008, at 11:35 AM, Maarten Bosteels wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Feb 10, 2008 5:28 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Is it ready? You're only at M1. What are the next milestones
> >> planne
On Feb 10, 2008, at 11:35 AM, Maarten Bosteels wrote:
Hello,
On Feb 10, 2008 5:28 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is it ready? You're only at M1. What are the next milestones
planned
before you hit beta?
The version numbering scheme is described at the bottom of
http://
Hello,
On Feb 10, 2008 5:28 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it ready? You're only at M1. What are the next milestones planned
> before you hit beta?
The version numbering scheme is described at the bottom of
http://mina.apache.org/downloads.html [1]
IMO we should have cre
Is it ready? You're only at M1. What are the next milestones planned
before you hit beta?
Regards,
Alan
On Feb 9, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Maarten Bosteels wrote:
Sticking to MINA 2.0 overall will be in the best interest of the
community
I couldn't agree more. I really see no reason to stick
> Sticking to MINA 2.0 overall will be in the best interest of the community
I couldn't agree more. I really see no reason to stick with 1.x
In fact, I think we should 'release' MINA-2.0-M1 asap.
Maarten
On Feb 9, 2008 7:49 PM, Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2008 12:39 PM,
Alex Karasulu wrote:
> IMO I think looking ahead towards the use of MINA 2.0 is the best route here
> and it seems that people have already taken care of the merge. Perhaps
> there's some emails that you may have missed on the commits@ list and here.
> Mike already merged the two I think unless I
I agree...I think 2.0 is the way to go...the enhancements really make it
nicer.
Jeff
Alex Karasulu wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2008 12:39 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 9, 2008, at 6:09 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 9, 2008 3:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Feb 9, 2008 12:39 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Feb 9, 2008, at 6:09 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>
> > On Feb 9, 2008 3:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> What should I use? I prefer the API from Geronimo but I see that it
> >> doesn't get built in
On Feb 9, 2008, at 6:09 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Feb 9, 2008 3:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What should I use? I prefer the API from Geronimo but I see that it
doesn't get built in in Mina. I would also prefer to use Mina 1.x
and
wait until Mina 2.x shakes itself
Hi Alan,
Great to see you here btw. When Alan is interested in a project that only
means it's going places :).
On Feb 9, 2008 3:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What should I use? I prefer the API from Geronimo but I see that it
> doesn't get built in in Mina. I would also
What should I use? I prefer the API from Geronimo but I see that it
doesn't get built in in Mina. I would also prefer to use Mina 1.x and
wait until Mina 2.x shakes itself out.
So, I'm going to toss out the idea of releasing the new API as 1.0 and
we can release the new Mina 2.x based API
17 matches
Mail list logo
