On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 22:57:38 -0700, March, Andres wrote
+1 for Apache guidelines
And +1 for a 1.0 release after a maven build is implemented
+1 to what he said :-) .
Scott
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be
March, Andres wrote:
+1 for Apache guidelines
And +1 for a 1.0 release after a maven build is implemented
I concur
--
Dr. Sean Radford, MBBS, MSc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bladesys.demon.co.uk/
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE
Ben Alex wrote:
Scott McCrory wrote:
No objections - release early and release often... But are you
sure it's just a 0.61 release? I'd recommend 0.7, as most
non-programmers (and some bit twiddlers too) consider anything prior
to 1.0 not mature enough for production, and I think Acegi is a
IMHO :
+1 for Apache guidelines.
+1 for 0.6.1 (same reason as Ben).
---
Ricardo
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:52:44 +1000, Ben Alex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Scott McCrory wrote:
No objections - release early and release often... But are you sure it's
just a 0.61 release? I'd recommend 0.7, as
+1 for Apache guidelines.
+1 for 0.6.1
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Ricardo Matinata
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 11:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Acegisecurity-developer] Release 0.61
IMHO :
+1 for Apache guidelines
Scott McCrory wrote:
No objections - release early and release often... But are you sure it's
just a 0.61 release? I'd recommend 0.7, as most non-programmers (and some
bit twiddlers too) consider anything prior to 1.0 not mature enough for
production, and I think Acegi is a lot further along
+1 for Apache guidelines
And +1 for a 1.0 release after a maven build is implemented
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
Ben Alex
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 10:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Acegisecurity-developer
