+1 on swapping the major version number. Thats how we can revise API, change modularity (as Niclas said) + naming changes.
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org> wrote: > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com> > wrote: > > I'd say a new artifact. > > In Pax Web we do have also a SPI bundle which looks like it > > grew over time with additional stuff. > > > > so +1 for new Artefact > > I kind of agree, except that it introduces a small incompatibility. > One must have the SPI bundle installed as well, which means that it is > not a simple 'version' change to get the new feature. > > However, this could be seen as 'small enough' OR we could say that we > will go with a 2.0 release with an additional change; > * "Pax Logging Service" is renamed to "Pax Logging - Log4J Backend" > so that a "Pax Logging - LogBack Backend" is treated on equal grounds > and people have no default choice. > > > Cheers > -- > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java > > I live here; http://tinyurl.com/3xugrbk > I work here; http://tinyurl.com/24svnvk > I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > general@lists.ops4j.org > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general > -- Toni Menzel Source <http://tonimenzel.com>
_______________________________________________ general mailing list general@lists.ops4j.org http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
