Re: What's coming for 2.0 (Was: Re: Publish changes without e-mail notification)

2013-10-18 Thread Matthew Woehlke
On 2013-10-18 17:37, Christian Hammond wrote: On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: On 2013-10-18 17:19, Christian Hammond wrote: Yep. demo.reviewboard.org and reviews.reviewboard.org are running this (though a week out of date I think). Hmm, both of those 403 for me...? T

Re: What's coming for 2.0 (Was: Re: Publish changes without e-mail notification)

2013-10-18 Thread Christian Hammond
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > On 2013-10-18 17:19, Christian Hammond wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: >> >> Is there is a 'sandbox' server running the bleeding edge anywhere? I >>> suppose I could always roll my own, but it would be

Re: What's coming for 2.0 (Was: Re: Publish changes without e-mail notification)

2013-10-18 Thread Matthew Woehlke
On 2013-10-18 17:19, Christian Hammond wrote: On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: Is there is a 'sandbox' server running the bleeding edge anywhere? I suppose I could always roll my own, but it would be cool if there was a convenient way for curious folks to play around with

Re: What's coming for 2.0 (Was: Re: Publish changes without e-mail notification)

2013-10-18 Thread Christian Hammond
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > On 2013-10-17 16:19, Christian Hammond wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: >> >>> Wait... what happened to 1.8? :-) >>> >> >> 1.8 is becoming 2.0. >> >> Here's a brief summary of what's changed since 1.7: >>

Re: What's coming for 2.0 (Was: Re: Publish changes without e-mail notification)

2013-10-18 Thread Matthew Woehlke
On 2013-10-17 16:19, Christian Hammond wrote: On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: Wait... what happened to 1.8? :-) 1.8 is becoming 2.0. Here's a brief summary of what's changed since 1.7: [...] Thanks. Sounds very cool and exciting! * Given the rewrite, we have fewer

Re: What's coming for 2.0 (Was: Re: Publish changes without e-mail notification)

2013-10-18 Thread David Trowbridge
Extensions written for 1.7.x are compatible. The changes in 2.0 will just make a lot of things (like shipping javascript/css as part of your extension) a lot easier and adds new hooks and capabilities. -David On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 12:56 PM, wrote: > Sounds cool! > > Would you expect the revi

Re: What's coming for 2.0 (Was: Re: Publish changes without e-mail notification)

2013-10-18 Thread markdbeyer
Sounds cool! Would you expect the revised extension framework to be backwards compatible with 1.7 extensions ? thanks Mark On Thursday, October 17, 2013 1:19:56 PM UTC-7, Christian Hammond wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Matthew Woehlke > > > wrote: > >> On 2013-10-17 15:31, Ch

What's coming for 2.0 (Was: Re: Publish changes without e-mail notification)

2013-10-17 Thread Christian Hammond
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > On 2013-10-17 15:31, Christian Hammond wrote: > >> [...] our plate's pretty full right now trying to get RB 2.0 ready to >> ship. >> > > Wait... what happened to 1.8? :-) > > If you're really planning a major version bump (i.e. that wasn