It sounds confusing as hell for our users. They already are struggling with 2 versions of wicket on the classpath... I'd hate to see our mailinglist flooded with questions regarding classdefnotfound and classnotfound errors. So I'd just keep 1.3 with deprecations, and ship 1.4 without them. This gives folks enough time to migrate their app if they choose to.
Martijn On Dec 16, 2007 5:32 PM, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > no we dont do it now. when we are ready to release 1.3.0 we first tag > it and build the -migrate release. then remove all the deprecations > and built the final. makes sense? > > -igor > > > On Dec 16, 2007 2:27 AM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So we tag what we have now with deprications. Then remove all the > > deprications then tag/branch again what than is the 1.3.x stream? > > > > Then everybody that upgrades has to compile first with the depricated > > one? That should be told then very clearly because if somebody waits > > until 1.3.1 and just targets that one then it is much harder and > > easier to make mistakes. But i guess the only solution for that is > > keep the deprications/finals until 1.4 but that clutters api for 1.3 > > > > > > On 12/15/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > i would prefer 1.3.0 to have all the deprecations removed > > > > > > release something like 1.3.0-compat with all deprecations and 1.3.0without > > > > > > -igor > > > > > > > > > On Dec 15, 2007 10:03 AM, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > We should also do a deprecation release. We could make our first > > > > 'final' release this (1.3.0), and remove all the finals and > > > > deprecations etc with 1.3.1. Or would you prefer something else? > > > > > > > > Eelco > > > > > > > > > > -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0-rc2 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-rc1/
