I also prefer that we release the current branch as is. The 2.1.0 will have only one significant change : the stability. I think it is enough. We'll add more new things on 2.X. I don't think that it is a good idea if we add new features and instabilities in this branch that was long to deliver...
Arnaud On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Mauro Talevi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Brian E. Fox wrote: > >> Exactly. I don't think we need to reopen this up to a bunch more >> changes, we can make more releases later. If I thought we would be >> opening a can of worms for this originally, I probably wouldn't have >> been in favor of it. My understanding was that 2.0.10 became 2.1.0 and >> more changes would follow on 2.x since we moved out 3.0. >> >> > I agree with Brian. However tempting to have more features creep in > because of the new dot release (as opposed to dot dot) it's better to > release a stable version (on which there is now a consensus that it has > sufficiently evolved from 2.0.x branch) and focus on next release. > > Release early, release often ... etc :-) > > Cheers > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- .......................................................... Arnaud HERITIER .......................................................... OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com www.octo.com | blog.octo.com .......................................................... ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org www.apache.org | maven.apache.org ...........................................................
