Can we include auto-wire support in 4.1? Has anyone had a chance to look at that? I think it will make Tapestry development a bit easier if you don't have to manually inject your HiveMind services.
-----Original Message----- From: Jesse Kuhnert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 9:19 AM To: Tapestry development Subject: Re: Releases - what's in and where Oh geez. I better have 4.1 done before the end of the month :) No I wouldn't worry about a couple month wait time. On 5/2/06, Brian K. Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > What I don't want is a protracted delay between releases. If we can push > the doc changes up, merge the rest in with 4.1, and still get out the > door within a couple of months, I'm good. If it'll be much longer than > that, I'd rather push 4.0.3 out end of month, then 4.1 after. Trying to > balance the "too long between releases" and "too short between releases". > > I'll look at merging up with the tapestry4/trunk with the changes we > have so far - relieve you of that. ;-) Have tried to stay out of the 4.1 > area so I wouldn't step on toes, but it sounds like it at least has > shoes on now (so stepping is possible, but not as painful if it happens > :-)) > > Brian > > Jesse Kuhnert wrote: > > Hmmm...It is hard to project a 4.1 release date, but I can say that > > most of > > the hard work is done already. It's more a matter of agonizing over how > to > > make this as easy and simple for people to interact with (when > developing > > components) as possible. It's close, but I'm still not happy. > > > > Since documentation can always be updated independently of a > release(unless > > it's documentation on an unreleased feature ), I'd prefer to just kill > off > > anymore 4.0 releases and concentrate on 4.1. > > > > Merging up sounds like a great idea :) I've been putting off doing > another > > merge since the last time I did one I somehow managed to blow away a lot > of > > work without even noticing. (which subsequently caused many precious > hours > > to be lost ) The longer the merges stay out of sync the worse in my > > opinion. > > 4.1 is stable enough that I don't think anything I'm doing will affect > > anyone unless they try to code to the new API interface features while > I'm > > still changing them. > > > > That's my take on it. I'd prefer to have more pressure on getting 4.1 > > out as > > well to be honest. If people start depending on changes made only to 4.1 > > and > > I'm the only one holding things up it'll make peer pressure do more of > its > > magical work :) > > > > On 5/1/06, Brian K. Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > > Hmmm... > > > > What is your projected timeframe for a 4.1 release? > > > > Reason I ask: If it's going to be a while, would your sentiment still > > hold true if I were to take on the responsibility of merging the 4.0.X > > changes into your 4.1? Especially for 4.0.3 (what has been resolved and > > is currently in JIRA slated for 4.0.3), most of the changes are > > documentation - but some of that documentation is in Javadoc. There are > > still more changes that Andy and I have marked for 3.0.5 and 4.0.3 - > > some of which add (small?) features (which prompted my question about > > whether it should be 4.1 instead of 4.0.3) but is still backward > > compatible. > > > > If it's decided to go with the X.Y.Z method of release numbering (which > > I believe is pretty standard across the board), would it change anything > > to move your work to 4.2 and release 4.1 with what's currently marked > > 4.0.3? Again, I'd be willing to merge up with you instead of you merging > > back from us. > > > > ("compelling" is always very subjective. :-)) > > > > Brian > > > > Jesse Kuhnert wrote: > >> If at all possible I'd like to avoid a 4.0.3 release, unless there is a > >> very > >> compelling reason to make one. > > > >> There are still a few svn merges that need to happen from the 4.0.X to > >> 4.1branches but I ~hope~ everything remains backwards compatible as > >> is. > > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) > > iD8DBQFEV1p6aCoPKRow/gARAmfCAKCTYswpya0dAXifcLSp3G0Gbxs3qwCgkhTc > ot8wEeqMYpa8YYe6i+DxHXw= > =Ja/5 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Jesse Kuhnert Tacos/Tapestry, team member/developer Open source based consulting work centered around dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
