I'm going to start working on this... looks like there are more
problems that I thought, though not hard to fix... just a PITA.
--jason
On Jan 20, 2008, at 8:13 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Jan 19, 2008, at 1:18 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On Jan 18, 2008 3:15 AM, Kevan Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I agree with Jason. We shouldn't be carrying forward the current
structure.
And, I think we have enough time to fix this problem while we are
fixing
other issues with the release.
Even though I tend to agree I understand the pain of our end users
who
suffer from working with 2.0.2 when we keep telling them use the
unofficial 2.1 release and I wish we could release G 2.1 as soon as
possible. No issues should be counted any more. Just go ahead,
release
and keep working on 2.2 release.
Jacek,
Let's level-set for a second. From my original note on this subject:
On Jan 16, 2008, at 10:27 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
I'd like to set a target of 2 weeks for reviewing and fixing
problems. After that would start the branching, final tck, and
packaging work. If we feel this might negatively impact post-2.1
development activities. We can consider creating a 2.1 branch
sooner...
Are you ok with the 2 week target for reviewing the current trunk
codebase and resolving issues?
The structure of our pom's are one of the issues that I think have
been identified in our current codebase. Seems like we can resolve
the problem within our 2 week timeframe. So, I'm all for fixing the
poms...
--kevan
