Just an observation, but isn't 2.2 a redesign from 2.1.x branch that
significantly restructured Cocoon (Maven, CForms, XSP deprecated, etc)?
2.1.x is legacy as 1.8.x is now legacy. 2.2 would be current and
2.3/3.0 development/experimental.
Debian has 4 Branches. At least if all possible their sho
Bruce Atherton wrote:
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Many thanks to everybody, who has participated so far, for your
feedback.
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we voted about it and the voting proposal was rejected.
The main reason is that large organizations (e.g. banks) are years
behind in their usage of new
Grzegorz Kossakowski escribió:
Marc Driftmeyer napisał(a):
If Banking Institutions are the reason then we should fork the tree to
have two branches ala Firefox.
One that targets legacy systems and the other for moving the system
forward.
There are already two branches! One "2.1.x" and another
Marc Driftmeyer napisał(a):
If Banking Institutions are the reason then we should fork the tree to
have two branches ala Firefox.
One that targets legacy systems and the other for moving the system
forward.
There are already two branches! One "2.1.x" and another "trunk". When we
C2.2 is out,
If Banking Institutions are the reason then we should fork the tree to
have two branches ala Firefox.
One that targets legacy systems and the other for moving the system
forward.
- Marc
--- Bruce Atherton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> >
> > Many thanks to everybody, who h
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Many thanks to everybody, who has participated so far, for your feedback.
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we voted about it and the voting proposal was rejected.
The main reason is that large organizations (e.g. banks) are years
behind in their usage of new JDK releases and that we
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Many thanks to everybody, who has participated so far, for your feedback.
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we voted about it and the voting proposal was rejected.
The main reason is that large organizations (e.g. banks) are years
behind in their usage of new JDK releases and that we
Quote: "I use cocoon because I like bleeding-edge technologies"
Surely Cocoon is an incredibly stable, mainstream application by now -
in the same ball-park as Struts et al.
After all, its been around about 7 years!
"Ruby on rails"... now *that* might be "bleeding-edge"!
>>> Johannes Textor
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we have started to dicuss whether we can make Java 5
becoming the minimum requirement for Cocoon 2.2. Note that this
discussion is completly unrelated to Cocoon 2.1 which needs JDK 1.3.
The arguments pro Java 5 which was officially releases almost 2
+1
This comes from my user perspective, since I don't normally depend on
large entities to host my applications, but can rather set up my own
servers and install the software I need. In fact, I think that entities
with a more conservative migration strategy would not typically use
cocoon to develo
+1
Erron
On 8/16/06, Ralph Skulbörstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1Ralph--Meddelandet har kontrollerats mot virus samt skadligtinnehåll av MailScanner och förmodas vara säkert.
-To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For addi
+1
Ralph
--
Meddelandet har kontrollerats mot virus samt skadligt
innehåll av MailScanner och förmodas vara säkert.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1, Java 1.5 has been here for a while and several projects which we
depend on are going to 1.5 as well
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we have started to dicuss whether we can make Java 5
becoming the minimum requirement for Cocoon 2.2. Note that this
discussion is completly unre
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we have started to dicuss whether we can make Java 5
becoming the minimum requirement for Cocoon 2.2.
+1
Askild
-
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands
Count this as a big +1 from me. We only run cocoon in a Java 5 VM anyway.
The Concurrency package alone is a big reason to adopt Java 5. The speed
of many algorithms can be vastly improved, as well as being made more
thread-safe. Then there is the enhanced type safety you get with
generics. Y
> -Original Message-
> From: Reinhard Poetz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we have started to dicuss whether we can make
> Java 5 becoming the
> minimum requirement for Cocoon 2.2.
I've been using Java 5 for deployment for some time so it isn't a problem for
me.
Count me in for Java 5. I've got some concerns with Maven on Debian not
having Maven 2 in its Unstable branch but I'll get over that one.
On OS X Java 5 has been standard for quite sometime. Working with Java
5 for WebObjects or Cocoon2.2 solely would be nice. Java 6 previews are
also installed wh
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we have started to dicuss whether we can make Java 5
becoming the minimum requirement for Cocoon 2.2. Note that this
discussion is completly unrelated to Cocoon 2.1 which needs JDK 1.3.
The arguments pro Java 5 which was officially releases almost 2
werner napisał(a):
+1
* Cocoon was always "next generation" technology. I think it's more
fun for the developers to work with Java 5. Fun is an important factor
in open source projects.
* It will take some time until a new stable Cocoon 2.2 will be out and
it will take much more time until pe
Reinhard Poetz ha scritto:
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we have started to dicuss whether we can make Java 5
becoming the minimum requirement for Cocoon 2.2. Note that this
discussion is completly unrelated to Cocoon 2.1 which needs JDK 1.3.
The arguments pro Java 5 which was officially releases alm
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we have started to dicuss whether we can make Java 5
becoming the minimum requirement for Cocoon 2.2. Note that this
discussion is completly unrelated to Cocoon 2.1 which needs JDK 1.3.
The arguments pro Java 5 which was officially releases almost
I think, we should, given also that Java 6 is in the pipeline.
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we have started to dicuss whether we can make Java 5
becoming the minimum requirement for Cocoon 2.2. Note that this
discussion is completly unrelated to Cocoon 2.1 which needs JDK 1.3.
Fine by me.>>> Reinhard Poetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006/08/10 11:32 AM >>>
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] we have started to dicuss whether we can make Java 5 becoming the minimum requirement for Cocoon 2.2. Note that this discussion is completly unrelated to Cocoon 2.1 which needs JDK 1.3.The arguments pro
23 matches
Mail list logo
