I think just go ahead and create the branch. Tags/Branches in svn are cheap and if anyone doesn't like it can always be re-done/reversed.
Niall On 2/7/07, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd like to do this for the 1.x line as well. I want to push out a new 1.3.7 with a few tiny patches to fix the defunct 1.3.6, and then push in more radical features. Do I need a vote? Wait 72 hours? Do it alone? Just asking on the procedure. Paul Ted Husted wrote: > We almost branched before, so let's go ahead and do it now. > > My only request would be that we tkeep the new feature set for 2.1.x > manageable, so that we can move to another GA release of that series > soon. As triggers, I would suggest: > > * Refactoring of Dojo and Portlet support to plugins > * Extracting the "new API", unitl we can revisit it when Guice stabalizes > > -Ted. > > > On 2/7/07, Philip Luppens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 2/7/07, Rene Gielen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Craig, >> > >> > So feature freeze and branch 2.0.x now, only fix reported bugs from >> beta >> > tests and roll out the result as GA, while trunk moves on to 2.1.x, >> > fully open for new features and whatever? IMO this would be the perfect >> > way to go, you get a big +1 from me on this :) >> > >> > - Rene >> >> +1 >> I totally agree with this. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
