Sounds like a good idea. I'd prefer GAHC to use the same artifactId with our current trunk stuff as Alex suggested for smooth transition (and less pollution in our Maven repository :). What do you think about moving GAHC to /asyncweb/branches/1.0 instead of sandbox? I'm fine with releasing GAHC with AsyncWeb Client 1.0 and release AsyncWeb suite (i.e. client + server) with the version number 2 after then.
Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > Exactly, a clear demarcation. It's really G AHC in it's new home. > Also, we're committed that it's a deprecated line and that, when the new > stuff is ready, everyone should be using the new 2.0 stuff that's built > on MINA 2.0 goodness. > > Regards, > Alan > > On Apr 3, 2008, at 12:53 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote: > >> Why not have the same artifactId and just have different version? Or you >> want a clear demarcation so there can be no confusion? >> >> Alex >> >> 2008/4/3 Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >>> Yep, that's it. >>> >>> The idea was for it to get its own branch and we release it under 1.0 of >>> it's own artifactId, which would be different than the artifactId of >>> the new >>> client that Mike et al are working on. This would be 2.0 and written >>> from >>> "scratch" off of MINA 2.0. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Alan >>> >>> >>> >>> On Apr 3, 2008, at 11:45 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote: >>> >>> I think it's this: >>>> >>>> http://www.nabble.com/-AsyncWeb--build-broken-w--last-checkin-td15784297.html >>>> >>>> >>>> Look towards the bottom (the most recent) of the thread... We >>>> discussed >>>> making it a branch of asyncweb. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Sangjin >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 11:21 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Where do I look in the headers? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Alan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 3, 2008, at 9:51 AM, "이희승 (Trustin Lee) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Uh.. did we? Could you tell me the message ID so I can re-read the >>>>> >>>>>> related thread? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Alan D. Cabrera wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> The discussion that took place earlier was that this would be our >>>>>>> v1.0 >>>>>>> release of Async client in the Mina project, IIRC. I think it >>>>>>> still >>>>>>> needs to be put to a vote. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Alan >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2008, at 6:48 AM, "이희승 (Trustin Lee) >>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let's move it to the sandbox first and then find out the best way >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> merge it to upstream (AsyncWeb). WDYT? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Rick McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Changes to the 1.1.5 AHC client in the Geronimo sandbox appear >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>> settled down, so I think now would be a good time to move it >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> the Mina >>>>>>>>> project if everybody agrees. Where would be the appropriate >>>>>>>>> place >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> put this client? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Rick >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Trustin Lee - Principal Software Engineer, JBoss, Red Hat >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> what we call human nature is actually human habit >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> http://gleamynode.net/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>> Trustin Lee - Principal Software Engineer, JBoss, Red Hat >>>>>> -- >>>>>> what we call human nature is actually human habit >>>>>> -- >>>>>> http://gleamynode.net/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > -- Trustin Lee - Principal Software Engineer, JBoss, Red Hat -- what we call human nature is actually human habit -- http://gleamynode.net/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
