2.3.4 was a bit of an emergency fix, so the vote was indeed deferred for the GA stamp.
I think we should proceed exactly as you suggest, vote for GA anytime. Clinton On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Brandon Goodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Also, here is our policy: > > > http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/IBATIS/iBATIS+Release+Process > > Did we vote on 3.4? If not, we should probably do that so that we can > consider it GA. > > B > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Brandon Goodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > >> The way i see it, if we consider something stable we push it out as GA. If >> for some reason it fails to uphold to the quality standards of GA we can >> always downgrade it to beta, fix it, and push it out a new release as GA. >> The whole GA thing has more to do with terminology than anything. So as far >> as I'm concerned GA is implicit when we release something. Am I wrong? >> >> B >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Kai Grabfelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >>> Hi there, >>> >>> is there anything that speak against promoting 2.3.4 (or possibly at >>> least 2.3.3) as GA? 2.3.4 is already in >>> the maven repos. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Kai >>> >>> >> >
