On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 11:26, Reinhard Poetz wrote: > From: Steven Noels <snip/> > > 2) We need to break from the impasse of 2.1.1 vs 2.2 > > > > I suggested yesterday night that the reshuffling of docs that Carsten > > started really seems more apt for a 2.2 release. Also, the switch to > > Fortress and Real Blocks are destined towards that 2.2 release. I > > understand some Avalon peeps are glad to dive in and help us > > with that, > > which is great, but we should facilitate them. > > Yep, I have the same concerns. > > > > > Some people want to start with a 2.2 CVS module right away, > > others seem > > more relunctant and want the HEAD of 2.1 to evolve into 2.2. > > We need to > > decide on this, since it's blocking progress. > > Carsten made a good proposal how we can continue having 3 repositories > and how this can be done with only little code duplicating: > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=106076740711234&w=2 > > I'm +1 with his proposal - the reason is simple: Some people (and > customers too!) asked me if we have gone crazy and how they can update > Cocoon in the future without being alpha/beta-tester for 'real' blocks > and Fortress. We *must* be able to maintain 2.1 without all new features > like blocks and Fortress because IMNSHO these steps are to big for 2.1 > and I'm -1 on the changes in the current repository.
I'm also +1 for starting a new repository, but I don't like Carsten's proposal that much. I'd rather see the entire repository duplicated, and move all development effort to the 2.2 repository. Only bugfixes should be applied to the 2.1 repository, and occasional backports of new functionality if anyone wants to. -- Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
