Will we have a released version of MyFaces 1.2.1? I believe we do not want to include any SNAPSHOT versions as dependencies in our releases.
Vamsi On 9/21/07, Paul McMahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > After thinking about this some more I upgraded the MyFaces version to > 1.2.1-SNAPSHOT in server/trunk but not in the 2.0 branch. If trunk > is passing all JSF tests in time for 2.0.2 then I will upgrade there > as well. > > Best wishes, > Paul > > On Sep 17, 2007, at 2:10 PM, Paul McMahan wrote: > > > On Sep 17, 2007, at 1:49 PM, Joe Bohn wrote: > >> Paul McMahan wrote: > >>> Joe, you mentioned TCK and our ability to make 2.0.2 available by > >>> 9/21. I have a question for the team about that. I would like > >>> to bump Geronimo's version of MyFaces from 1.2.0 to 1.2.1 since > >>> that new release contains several bug fixes, some of them > >>> actually found and reported by Geronimo users. But doing that > >>> could affect Geronimo's TCK results and affect the 9/21 delivery > >>> date. I would imagine that the same is true for other > >>> dependencies. Are we OK with picking up maintenance releases > >>> of Geronimo dependencies in 2.0.2 even if we think TCK issues > >>> could slow us down? Or should we keep 2.0.2 focused on > >>> "localized" changes and only bump the dependency versions in > >>> Geronimo 2.1 so we have more time to deal any resulting TCK issues? > >> > >> I think it makes sense to move to the latest version of the > >> Geronimo dependencies. However, it probably makes sense to > >> validate areas in the TCK that may be impacted prior to the change > >> or soon there-after in case there are issues that need to be > >> resolve which might impact our ability to deliver in a timely manner. > > > > OK thanks Joe (and Kevan). Just wanted to make sure that overall > > as a team we agree that it's OK to introduce changes that could > > affect the proposed 9/21 date due to TCK issues. We can always > > back those changes out if we decide to, of course. > > > > Best wishes, > > Paul > >
