+1, but just a small suggestion. Right now I'm running the necessary steps for release myfaces core 1.2.7, core 1.1.7, so I would like if it is possible to delay this change after the release.
regards Leonardo Uribe 2009/5/27 Cagatay Civici <cagatay.civ...@gmail.com> > +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 >> > >> > >
