Hi Paul, On 20/01/06, Paul Libbrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There's at least a major issue to be solved before a release of jelly > and jelly-xml: Gump testing, including the usage of the latest jexl as > well as hope for a release of jaxen. > > The problems is that many unit-tests currently fail because jexl now > handles correctly primitive types but then may be wrong add doing > equality of expressions using primitive number types. > > As for jaxen, the problem is just that we wish to be using... a release. >
Thanks for the status. Sounds like a long chain of release-waiting... do you guys have any idea on the release plans of jexl and jaxen ? > Finally, for jelly-1.1, there's this large wish for a more > understandable tag-caching which we just haven't done yet... but that > could be, maybe, unfortunately, delayed to or 2.0... I'd be in favor of delaying that indeed ;-) Cheers, greg > Diogo Quintela (EF) wrote: > > I back you up Greg. > > Indeed, we are only using those because of core/xml related changes (xml > > pipeline / xml namespace) introduced to support those xsd declarations > > (but are by far more than that) > > > > Paul Libbrecht has worked on those > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JELLY-214 > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JELLY-213 > > > > Regarding releasing as RC, I am +1 on this, but after-all, that's only my > > silent vote :-) > > > > Regards > > Diogo > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hi list, > >> > >> As recently and quickly discussed on irc with Dion, I was wondering if > >> there would be any possible plans for releasing jelly and > >> jelly-tags-xml. I'm writing as one of the xdoclet2 developers: we > >> currently depend on post-1.0 snapshots of both of -core and -tags-xml, > >> and, as you might guess, we'd very much like to switch back to stable > >> releases. > >> > >> As far as I can tell, the only reason we use these versions is because > >> they added support for xsd declarations in generated xml documents. > >> (And xdoclet2 has plugins to generate j2ee descriptors which require > >> an xsd declaration) > >> > >> Of course we'd be very keen on testing any RC, and our test codebase > >> might help in that respect. > >> > >> Does this sound feasible / would anyone be interested in pushing this out > >> ? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> greg > >> > >> > >> ps: the snapshots we currently use are actually timestamped versions: > >> commons-jelly-20050813.225330 & commons-jelly-tags-xml-20050823.222913 > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
