> Okay, I personally don't like the situation that the 1.0 branch is > kind of abandoned currently, especially when considering that HEAD > represents a new major version with API changes and all that. > > So, I've spent some time today to go through the commit messages of > the past 3 months and browsing through cvsview. I've come up with a > list of changes that I personally consider "portable" to 1.0, i.e. not > necessarily bug-fixes in the strict sense, but also clean-up and tiny > feature-additions. I've attached a list of the commit messages > (without the diffs), annotated with comments about what I think should > be done. I have applied most of the changes in that list to my local > working copy of the 1.0 branch, and couldn't find any serious > problems, but more testing will follow.
Great initiative. Extremely useful work :) +1 for the proposed changes (I didn't go through the list item by item, but it looks reasonable, and I trust your judgement). > Now, if all could just check the list and shout out loud if they feel > something shouldn't be there or something else is missing. > > In addition, we should consider adding the following new features to > the 1.0 branch as well: > - J2EE-Stores (is it ready yet?) It's probably ready for a beta, but unfortunately this store won't work in the 1.x embedded server (it relies exclusively on JNDI to retrieve the DataSource, and that is not supported in TC 4.0.x). I would port it anyway, as it is very useful to improve scalability. The J2EE content store doesn't have the latest code at the moment (or we need to merge the two stores). > - XMLFileDescriptorsStore I didn't test it at all, so I have no opinion on this. > - WebdavFile and the JFileChooser It wouldn't hurt. > - others? > > What would the version number of this release be? 1.1.0 (beta) or > 1.0.17 (beta)? It depends on how significant we feel the changes over 1.0.16 are. If we also add the iems mentioned above, 1.1.0 looks a good version number. > [And btw, why's Slide the only Jakarta-project using > that versioning scheme? ;o)] It's Apache 2 versioning number. I liked it, proposed it a while ago, and it was accepted. Quite frankly I expected it to become used by other projects at Apache, but it didn't happen. Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
