Asking on general@ sounds good to me. Sorry for not being responsive in the last few months, I have a very time-conduming project running at work.
Thomas Scott Eade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 06.07.2007 01:30:24: > Thomas Vandahl wrote: > > How do we proceed here? I wanted to call for a release vote but I would > > rather sort this out before. Is it possible to use the Village code as > > it is (2.0, I mean)? Then we could simply wrestle it and check it in. Or > > do we have to change the packages and all imports That would be a PITA > > because at least Record is probably used by most of the Torque applications. > I did ask on members@ whether or not it would be okay for us to retain > the existing package names. There was a little discussion over whether > or not we could import this code (which we can) but nobody raised any > concerns about the package naming (i.e. the question to which I made > serious efforts to point the discussion towards was ignored and I am > interpreting this as "there are no serious concerns with this"). > > Since Torque is the responsibility of the DB PMC I will raise this on > general@ so that there is an opportunity for objections to be raised there. > > Scott > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
