Stefano Bagnara wrote:
This vote will expire in 5 days from now (30/10/2006 20:10 CET).
>
"next-minor":
- based on 2.3.0
- storage and config.xml compatibile with 2.3.0
- selective choice of what to backport from trunk.
- ETA: branch on Nov/Dec 2006, release on Dec/Jan 2007
[ ] +1 I will work on that release
[ ] 0 Indifferent (+0 and -0 are welcome to understand the feelings)
[ ] -1 I think James project doesn't need a similar release
+1
none
+/- 0
Stefano Bagnara (binding)
Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini (binding)
Guillermo Grandes
Norman Maurer (binding)
Danny Angus (binding)
Bernd Fondermann (binding)
-1
none
"next-major":
- based on current trunk
- storage and config.xml compatible with 2.3.0
- ETA: branch on Dec 2006/Jan 2007, release on Mar 2007
[ ] +1 I will work on that release
[ ] 0 Indifferent (+0 and -0 are welcome to understand the feelings)
[ ] -1 I think James project doesn't need a similar release
+1
Stefano Bagnara (binding)
Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini (binding)
Guillermo Grandes
Norman Maurer (binding)
Danny Angus (binding)
Bernd Fondermann (binding)
+/- 0
none
-1
none
So it seems everyone agreed: no one want to work on the next-minor but
no one is against it and everyone want to work directly on next-major.
Now that we confirmed this, I think we should avoid committing to trunk
anything that we already know we're not going to include in next-major
(repository refactoring, dsn and other non backward compatible changes)
until we don't branch (this will simplify the workflow).
I'll update JIRA to reflect the existence of a "next-major" release and
move there what I guess will finish in next-major, then I'll start a
thread to discuss some more detail about next-major.
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
