+1 for 1.0-incubator-M2
On 10/09/06, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any more thoughts on this? Most popular so far is 1.0-incubator-M2
--
Jeremy
On Sep 8, 2006, at 10:17 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Before publishing artifacts to the snapshot repo I need to make
sure all the versions
Not trying to open any worm-cans, but having 1.0 at the start of the name
makes it look like it's a 1.0 release, when in actuality it's still a
milestone release - is this the effect we're looking for? Is the code at a
1.0 level of quality, stability and functionality? Or would people say this
is
Hi, I have the same thoughts as Andy and infact this is precisely why I
backed '0.95-incubator'.
- Venkat
On 9/11/06, Andrew Borley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not trying to open any worm-cans, but having 1.0 at the start of the name
makes it look like it's a 1.0 release, when in actuality it's
On Sep 11, 2006, at 1:24 AM, Andrew Borley wrote:
Not trying to open any worm-cans, but having 1.0 at the start of
the name
makes it look like it's a 1.0 release, when in actuality it's still a
milestone release - is this the effect we're looking for? Is the
code at a
1.0 level of quality,
Any more thoughts on this? Most popular so far is 1.0-incubator-M2
--
Jeremy
On Sep 8, 2006, at 10:17 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Before publishing artifacts to the snapshot repo I need to make
sure all the versions contain incubator which means updating all
the POMs. I would like to change
