Yeah I think too that 1.4.1.X is the best. I'd be happy to volunteer but am swamped with work. Thanks for the good work so far..
regards Nino 2009/8/13 Jeremy Thomerson <jer...@wickettraining.com>: > The idea behind the matching release numbers was so that Wicket newbs > could more easily adopt the most commonly used and supported > wicketstuff projects into their projects. I would like to be able to > still have that. No compatibility matrix needed - if you are using > Wicket 1.4.1 - use WS 1.4.1. That being said, I think that the best > solution is that we have 1.4.1.X where X is our release number. > > The biggest problem is still what a hassle it is to build a release. > When I built rc8, it took a couple days because people had broken junk > in trunk, not followed pom conventions, etc. Plus, syncing the build > artifacts to the repo was a pain because it's not documented, and I'm > no maven guru. > > I haven't even had time to build 1.4.0 to match Wicket yet, and that > is arguably the most important one since we started WS Core. > > If someone would like to help by building 1.4.0 and documenting a > streamlined process, I would love it. I have been running a Continuum > server that was doing continuous builds as well. I think that we > could see about using the release process on Continuum to run mvn > release:deploy and automating releases. I just don't have time this > week, and probably won't next week. > > So - anyone volunteering? > > -- > Jeremy Thomerson > http://www.wickettraining.com > > > > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:01 PM, nino martinez > wael<nino.martinez.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hmm I believe with may way it should be possible todo both.. >> >> However I don't much care what the releases are named its the quality >> that matters to me. No matter what the customer will blame me if >> something does not work, they don't care if its a 1.4, 1.4.1.1 >> release snapshot or snafu:) >> >> Jeremy are doing a fine job. However feedback are always nice, I like >> to get that too from my wicketstuffings. >> >> -my two cents.. >> >> 2009/8/12 Martijn Dashorst <martijn.dasho...@gmail.com>: >>> Given the lackluster release history of Wicket Stuff, I'd suggest >>> going with whatever the only person able *AND* willing to cut releases >>> wants. In this case, that is Jeremy. If you don't want to follow the >>> general Wicket Stuff release processes, you're welcome to maintain >>> your own projects and release them at your own schedule. >>> >>> It doesn't make sense to me to go back on a decision that was made, >>> just because 2 folks think it is "better". IMO having a release >>> following Wicket's releases is better than not having a release. >>> >>> The problem with Wicket Stuff is not that they follow the Wicket >>> release cycle, it is that nobody gives a damn to cut releases. Jeremy >>> fixed that. If you think you can do better, don't put your project in >>> the Wicket Stuff parent group, but release the software on your own. >>> >>> Martijn >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Reinhard >>> Nägele<reinhard.naeg...@mgm-tp.com> wrote: >>>> I'd like to second Maartens point. Identical releases to Wicket itself >>>> would >>>> mean that it always depends on Wicket. Independent releases would not be >>>> possible. Bugs could not be fixed and new features could not be added >>>> without a new Wicket release. This doesn't really make sense to me. >>>> >>>> Reinhard >>>> >>>> >>>> Jeremy Thomerson schrieb: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Now that Wicket 1.4.0 is out, I wonder which wicketstuff core version is >>>>>>> compatible. There is no 1.4.0 version of wicketstuff core (yet?). Should >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> use 1.4-rc8-SNAPSHOT? >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It should be just 1.4-SNAPSHOT. 1.4-rc8-SNAPSHOT was an accidental >>>>> relic of after I built rc8 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Side note: I don't see the version of wicket-stuff has to match exactly >>>>>> with version of wicket ? >>>>>> Suppose someone releases wicketstuff-core-1.4.0 today, and tomorrow some >>>>>> bugs are fixed in wicketstuff-core, then we can't release these bug-fixes >>>>>> until wicket 1.4.1 is out ? >>>>>> >>>>>> IMO, wicket is just a dependency of wicketstuff-code (as defoined in the >>>>>> pom) and both projects should use their own unrelated version numbers. >>>>>> >>>>>> wdyt ? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> When I setup wicketstuff-core, I proposed that we structure it to have >>>>> identical releases to Wicket. The community agreed. I still think >>>>> this should be the case. >>>>> -- >>>>> Jeremy Thomerson >>>>> http://www.wickettraining.com >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com >>> Apache Wicket 1.4 increases type safety for web applications >>> Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.4.0 >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
