On 3/8/07, Jean-Baptiste Quenot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Johan Compagner: > first not to screw the people that do use 2.0 twice that we drop > it and that they have to backport it with nothing not only the > constructor change but also the rest (and when they have done > that going to 1.3 and we release 1.4 they have to undo there > undo's again!) No, the goal is to let them move from 2.0 to 1.4 directly.
So they are just hanging around all the time waiting for use to finish up 1.3 and then start backporting stuff of 2.0? That can take weeks and weeks. We never really have have solid deadlines we are just a bunch of coders that spend time as much as we can on wicket. So it is finished when it is finished
secondly if we release that fast as it is now proposed then we > go instead of having 2 active branches (1.3 and 2.0) and one > maintenance (1.2) to 1 active branche (1.5) and 2 to maintain > (1.3 and 1.4) No, 1.4 will occur when 1.3 is frozen of course. And we'll be inciting users to upgrade. \
What is then the point of 1.3 if we say that if it is really a quickly build for people to use but it is replaces quickly with something else that they pretty much have to upgrade to? We can't and i stress this, we can't drop maintenance support of a release version that quickly is if the upgrade path means api changes! That is something we just can't do one extra point i also don't like is that we are now releasing many releases under the incubator flag.. I also don't like that. johan
