On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 12:25, Dave Johnson wrote:
> On Nov 2, 2005, at 12:52 PM, Elias Torres wrote:
> > We have a sample tag implementation started/running in our internal
> > pilot development environment and was wondering if we still have time
> > to sneak in a table before 2.0 is official. If we could do that we
> > could have tagging at some point in 2.x and won't have to wait til
> > 3.0. What do you all think?
> 
> I'm OK with this, because it would be an unused table, easy to 
> change/upgrade later. What does the table look like?
> 

I am actually a mixed bag on this right now.  We still haven't seen an actual 
proposal on how tag support would be implemented and I wouldn't feel 
comfortable approving this blindly.

I hope I am not sound too anal about the proposals, but I think it's in the 
best interest of the project if everyone has a chance to review a proposed 
implementation before making any significant changes.

Also note that there really doesn't need to be any reason to rush unless you 
truly feel that your implementation is almost done, which again would be weird 
since we haven't seen a proposal.  We can decide to move to a new major version 
at any time as long as everyone is agreed.  That means that we can go from 
Roller 2.1 to Roller 3.0 as far as I'm concerned.  The purpose of limiting db 
changes to major release upgrades was not to make it harder on us to change the 
db, but rather to make it easier on users to upgrade.

-- Allen


> 
> > Also, is it ok for me to commit some small changes such as trackback
> > security (limiting trackbacks to URL patterns in roller.properties)
> > optional of course and other small fixes to DB2/Derby to the trunk. We
> > are currently using a custom build internally where we maintain
> > patches to a specific revision number, therefore I'm trying to reduce
> > the number of patches to a minimum.
> 
> I'm committed your trackback security change already, so I assume 
> you're talking about a fix to that? If that's the case then go right 
> ahead.
> 
> - Dave
> 
> 
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Elias
> >
> 

Reply via email to