+1 for sure On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Aranda <brunoara...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 sounds good to me > > 2009/5/27 Matthias Wessendorf <mat...@apache.org>: > > so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts become > trunk ? > > > > -Matthias > > > > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann > > <bernd.bohm...@atanion.com> wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> I would prefer > >> > >> /trunk -> 2.0 > >> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x > >> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x > >> > >> because we are not using cvs anymore > >> > >> and the path already contains > >> > >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/ > >> > >> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name. > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Bernd > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <mat...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>> actually, I agree with Bernd. > >>> > >>> For the following layout: > >>> > >>> /trunk -> 2.0 > >>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x > >>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x > >>> > >>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk: > >>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec) > >>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it trunk) > >>> > >>> > >>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout" > >>> > >>> > >>> -Matthias > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf < > mat...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>> from Bernd, on a different thread: > >>>> > >>>> Hello, > >>>> > >>>> I would suggest following layout > >>>> > >>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x > >>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x > >>>> 2.0.x trunk > >>>> > >>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are > >>>> only in bugfix state. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz <werner.p...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>> ... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Ok, I filed this: > >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a > branch ... > >>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk" > >>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch: > >>>>>> -2.0.x > >>>>>> -1.1.x > >>>>>> > >>>>> +1 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Matthias Wessendorf > >>>> > >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Matthias Wessendorf > >>> > >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > >
