On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 12:35 +1100, Torsten Curdt wrote: > <snip/> > > Sounds all excellent ...but IMO that's exactly what JCL2 should > target on. I say: let's get started with the 2.x version.
there's nothing really holding up 2.0 now (from a technical perspective). i'll take a release branch from the RC5 tag. > I would not try to push that into the 1.x version. It's a pretty big change this new component would not require any changes to the 1.x version: it'd just be a more fully functional version of the NULL implementation you proposed earlier. my plan would be just to create a separate component that is fully compatible with the JCL 1.1 API and binary (but not semantically) compatible with the SPI. JCL 1.1 is likely to be around for quite a while so i'd like to have solutions available for those who are stuck with JCL 1.1. > ...and frankly speaking - it will also help marketing wise. JCL1 > has a bit of a bad reputation. JCL2 could help to leave this behind. it would be good to get JCL2 up and running ASAP but i'm not sure i have the energy to push it through (for the next few months, at least). i've dropped quite a lot of other stuff for JCL which really can't be left much longer. so, other people need to step up. anyone care to start a new JCL2.0 design thread? - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
