I think, JB already published a road-map before.
Basically it boils down to one thing:
"how do you swallow a whale, piece by piece"
So, for me it's more important to have 2.3, 2.4 and 3.0.1 done.
After that let's take a look at the "new" features for 4.0 like
SCR for core, Java7 Support which is
OK then 4.x it is.
And when do u feel its the right time to create a 4.x branch?
--
Ioannis Canellos
Blog: http://iocanel.blogspot.com
Twitter: iocanel
I have no idea how compatible jetty 9 and pax web 4 are. I think the
question should be if our users would have to do changes in their code.
If yes then we should delay the upgrade to 4.0 if not then there is no
issue.
What I wanted to say about karaf 4 is the way we do our versioning of
pack
Ok, so as far as I'm concerned, we won't do an upgrade to Pax Web 4.0 with
Jetty 9 in a Version 3 then.
regards, Achim
2014-02-04 Christian Schneider :
> I think we should not create a 4.0.0 version without doing incompatible
> changes.
> In marketing major versions are used to tell people that
I think we should not create a 4.0.0 version without doing incompatible
changes.
In marketing major versions are used to tell people that big functional
changes/additions have been done. The idea there is that a major version
sells better.
Our environment is very different though. Technically
Hi,
I really liked the idea to have a "smaller" core, though I still think it's
major change even if it is internal,
so this should go to a 4.0.
I hope we don't take another 3 years for the next major version, and I
don't plan on supporting this.
Still right now I don't see any value of opening an
