On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Martin Cooper wrote:
> Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:24:34 -0800
> From: Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Beta 1 update
>
> OK, that's fine. I can do the build either Tuesday or Wednesday. Let's shoot
> for code freeze at midnight tonight (i.e. 12:00 Pacific time on Monday).
> David (and Craig), if you need more time, let me know and we can extend the
> deadline to midnight on Tuesday instead.
>
> I'll make sure I tag the appropriate parts of Commons with the same tag.
> However, let me make sure what I have in mind matches what you have in mind,
> Craig. My plan is to build Beta 1 with the Release versions of Commons
> projects that we *can* build against, and CVS versions of those projects
> that don't have Release versions that we can use. This would mean Release
> versions of Collections (1.0), Digester (1.1.1) and Logging (1.0), and CVS
> versions of the rest. I would only tag the non-release project trees. Is
> this also what you had in mind?
>
I've only tested the Struts 1.1 code against the current HEAD branch of
Digester. This is also important in order to be able to put struts.jar in
a shared repository (like common/lib in Tomcat 4).
The 1.0 version of collections should be fine -- we only use FastHashMap.
> One more thing. Craig, there is one file that you removed after I previously
> tagged CVS, so I need to, uh, update the repository to remove the tag so
> that the file is not included in Beta 1. The file I need access to is:
>
> /home/cvs/jakarta-struts/src/share/org/apache/struts/util/Attic/GenericConne
> ction.java,v
>
> If you could chown the file to me, or allow group write access, I can make
> the change. Thanks.
>
Unfortunately, only root can chown files to someone else. I'd suggest we
just create a new "beta 1" tag instead.
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
Craig
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 9:23 AM
> Subject: Re: Beta 1 update
>
>
> > +1, but if you can wait until after midnight (Pacific Time) tonight, I'll
> > be able to get some more bug fixes done.
> >
> > I also did some fixes/enhancements in commons-beanutils over the weekend,
> > which raises a point -- it would also be good to tag the specific bits of
> > the Commons packages that you include in the beta with the same tag.
> > Since Martin has commit access on jakarta-commons, this shouldn't be a
> > problem. And, nobody should complain since CVS doesn't give a rip how
> > many tags there are (just don't create branch tags).
> >
> > Craig
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Martin Cooper wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:41:22 -0800
> > > From: Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Subject: Beta 1 update
> > >
> > > First of all, I sincerely apologise to you all for the length of time it
> is
> > > taking to get Beta 1 out the door. Unfortunately, I managed to get sick,
> and
> > > still haven't quite got back to full strength yet.
> > >
> > > A few things have happened since I tagged the CVS tree for Beta 1.
> > >
> > > 1) Craig has made a boatload of bug fixes to the code base.
> > >
> > > 2) Arron made some changes to the nested taglib which he requested be
> > > included in Beta 1.
> > >
> > > 3) David made many changes to Validator and the way it hooks into
> Struts. He
> > > also updated some of the files in CVS to tag them as part of Beta 1.
> > >
> > > 4) Rob is checking in UML diagrams as I write this.
> > >
> > > Given these changes, and especially given the already-updated tags in
> CVS, I
> > > think it would make sense at this point to retag the entire tree to pick
> up
> > > the latest of everything as Beta 1. This would give us a better,
> stronger,
> > > first beta. I promise to complete the beta release process in one phase
> this
> > > time, to avoid a repeat of the current situation.
> > >
> > > Is everyone OK with this approach?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Martin Cooper
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
