Jon Stevens wrote:
>
> on 1/2/2001 2:08 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > We have recurring questions on the Jetspeed mailing-list about our dependency
> > on Turbine and which version do we use.
> > Currently since Turbine is unreleased the only option we have is to use a
> > dated Turbine CVS image but this does not give any information of why this
> > day was picked and does not give us information on when do we need to
> > update our dependency.
> >
> > What do you think of tagging "stable points" in the Turbine CVS tree using
> > a convention like Turbine-M1, Turbine-M2, etc... for the benefit of the
> > Turbine-dependent projects ?
> >
> > This way we could have a policy of "always depend on the latest Turbine-MX"
> > CVS image and whenever Turbine integrates a new feature, you could create a
> > new tag which we would use to update our dependency.
>
> -1 That is the same as doing a release and we are not ready for release yet.
>
> You should simply document your reasons in your Jetspeed documentation.
>
I don't understand what you mean by this last sentence.
My issue is that I want Jetspeed to stay up-to-date with Turbine but at the same
time it's not practical (and it's time consuming) to follow Turbine progress
day to day and update the turbine.jar continuously so any scheme that can be used
to notify external projects that they *should* update their dependency because
some new features have been added or because of some bugfix would help a lot.
The current method of picking a Turbine CVS image whatever its status is and try
using it is definitely not reliable.
--
Rapha�l Luta - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vivendi Universal Networks - Services Manager / Paris
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
