Hi Andrew,
Andrew McIntyre wrote:
On 8/9/06, Rick Hillegas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi David,
I think there's a significant delta between the last snapshot and the
beta I plan to cut imminently. I would recommend that people wait for
the beta.
Are you planning do the beta out of the trunk? I don't think there's a
need to branch until there's actually potential for release. It'll
save a lot of merging.
I think this is a great idea. I will just cut the beta off the trunk.
Anyone know if there has been any movement on the issue surrounding
DERBY-1639? On legal-discuss, Bill Shannon suggested that the wording
in the spec license be changed to remove section 3. Geir agreed this
would be compatible with the ASL, and the thread ends there. As it is,
the description of the bug should probably be changed to 'Resolve
ASL-incompatible clause in the JDBC 4 spec license' or some such.
My understanding is that Bill Shannon is working on getting consensus
about new wording but there's nothing to report yet.
As for the rest of those 104 open 10.2 issues, I believe we should
start aggressively punting issues out to 10.2.2 or 10.3, or start
focussing efforts to resolve/doc them otherwise.
Agreed.
andrew
