Tests are good, but this could be also arranged with voting, or not? So what would be the best? Modify the trunk to use 1.4.7, and release the current state as wicketstuff 1.4.1 (because it's using 1.4.1 now) or modify the trunk first for 1.4.7 fix the incompatibilities if there are, and then release it as 1.4.7 and make trunk to follow 1.4-SNAPSHOT? Or what else do you have in mind? This sonarsource is good stuff, +1.
Peter 2010-03-23 12:33 keltezéssel, nino martinez wael írta: > +1 for me on upgrading wicketstuff core to 1.4.7. > > On another topic making sure that an upgrade actually works are > another thing. Code might compile but there could be runtime > problems.. I discussed looong time ago a possibility for making tests > for the javascript parts of the code aswell, with rhino... We could'nt > really call it stable until we made sure it where that. On another > node I'd suggest adding wicketstuff core to nemo.sonarsource.org , as > it would help showing code metrics etc.. > > 2010/3/23 Stefan Lindner <lind...@visionet.de>: >> Should we really start with a big bang? Support wicketstuff STABLE core >> releases for Wicket 1.4 AND 1.5RCx? Is a RC for Wicket 1.5 in sight? Or does >> this mean everything in wicketstuff will stay as it is for a long time? >> Why not start with a smaller step and create a core wicketstuff release for >> current wicket 1.4? >> >> Stefan >> >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: Major Péter [mailto:majorpe...@sch.bme.hu] >> Gesendet: Dienstag, 23. März 2010 11:38 >> An: users@wicket.apache.org >> Betreff: Re: Wicketstuff versioning >> >> 2010-03-23 11:24 keltezéssel, Boris Goldowsky írta: >>> I may be wrong, but wouldn't it make sense to delay creating a 1.4.x >>> branch until/unless someone actually wants to commit some code that >>> would be different for 1.4.x and 1.5-SNAPSHOT? Once we branch, we have >>> to start committing every bug fix to two different versions, right? >> >> Yes, you're right about this, maybe we should wait until the first 1.5 >> RC with it. >> >>> If we're lucky, everything in Wicketstuff may work fine unchanged with >>> 1.4 and 1.5, and I suggest we can save ourselves a large amount of >>> headache by just maintaining a single trunk, and bumping the version >>> after there's an official Wicket release. >> >> As far as I saw, there was some major modifications in the core around >> the request-handling and URL-strategies, so this could rise up some issues. >> >>> Of course, correct me if I'm wrong. I don't know how fundamentally >>> different wicket 1.5 is going to be, or if there are a lot of people >>> running snapshots of it now who would need Wicketstuff to be tracking >>> it. >> >> Is 1.5 RC1 good for everyone? :) >> >> Regards, >> Peter >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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
