On 11/13/06, easyproglife <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Xavier,

Changing packages names IMO is a major change. I don't think 1.5 is a good
candidate for such a version.

IMO, you should start from ivy 2.0 with apache package names.


On one hand I agree, 2.0 would better reflect the changes of package names
and the refactorings. On the other hand, a 2.0 with no major new feature
would not necessarily be well understood. Anyway, I have no strong opinion
on the subject, but Ivy 1.4 already break some code at API level, the main
difference here is that it would break all code :-)

That way, fixes to previous (backwards compatible) version would still be
able to be done on ivy 1.x branch.

I know you are going to tell me that no more changes are planned on
1.xbranch but from my experience in software development IT WILL BE!
(keep my
words :))


What I do not see is how could a new version with fr.jayasoft packages be
done? AFAIK nobody has the right to do so except jayasoft, and jayasoft
won't. Now that we are incubating on Apache, we should try to make a new
version with Apache package names as soon as possible, with only a small set
of changes, so that "1.x" developments could be made on the new apache
stream.

I don't know how many extension to ivy have been written so far, but please
don't break their code at 1.x branch.


I don't know either, but I'm afraid it's the price to pay with the move to
apache. This may imply that the migration to the first apache version will
take longer, because people using tools may have problems to migrate. I'm
afraid I do not see any good solution to that problem, simply because I see
no way to continue releasing jayasoft versions of Ivy... But maybe I'm
wrong?

Xavier

easyproglife.

On 11/13/06, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> In the thread "Ivy future development" Steve and I have already agreed
> that
> the first version of Ivy on Apache should focus on:
> - package rename from fr.jayasoft to org.apache.ivy (I'm not sure for
the
> apache package, maybe we should use something different?)
> - code refactorings aimed at code cleaning and better design, easing new
> developers involvment
>
> The reason for that is to be able to produce a first version on apache
in
> a
> short time, and to ease contributions to the code.
>
> Do everybody agree on this focus? How could we name this version? 1.5?
>
> Xavier
>
>


Reply via email to