Take the following with a grain of salt since I was told by a friend, of a
friend that attended the Server Side Symposium last week. I don't have any
of the details either so bear with me.
Apparently in a session related to 'corporations using open source' the
speaker asked if any companies were u
While we strive to keep binary compatibility between minor releases,
i.e. the z releases of an x.y.z release path, sometimes things slip
by. In principle we only allow security or blocker issues to break the
API in a .z release. So we strive to make the upgrade path of 1.4.0 to
1.4.16 to be just a
I'm not trying to start a war here and I guess this will be my only
contribution to this thread so with the risk of being punished by the wicket
community, I guess the speaker said like he said because wicket release
numbering doesn't follow "normal" version numbering (with "normal" I mean
what mos
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Martijn Dashorst <
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> While we strive to keep binary compatibility between minor releases,
> i.e. the z releases of an x.y.z release path, sometimes things slip
> by. In principle we only allow security or blocker issues to break t
