On 6/26/01 10:04 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i would like to check in my changes to the security system:
> (/proposals/sec)
>
> * om/peer classes are torque generated
> * SecurityEntitiy (interface) is used instead of SecurityObject (abstract
> class)
> * om classes implement SecurityEntity, Comparable
> * TurbineMapBuilder is no longer used (MapBuilders are generated)
>
> martin
I'm +1 on the method but where are we going to put these changes?
They will first go in HEAD, but do we want to back port them
to 2.1. I would prefer if we didn't as this would give people
a big incentive to move forward and I'm worried about the
maintenance problem between the proposal for for security
in 2.2 and what people are using in 2.1.
If we moved quickly to get an alpha of 2.2 out in a couple
of weeks could we keep these changes for 2.2 and forget about
back porting them?. I know the changes are pretty much backward compatible
but it's quite a radical change from what's in 2.1 now.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
