I don't know about having one version right now... Since I use Scarab at work, that is running under version 3.0. And since Scarab seems pretty full fledged ;-), I would say that if it is good enough for Scarab, then it is good enough for me. Thus making 3.0 basically a valid choice. And then, I use 2.1 for an old app, but because I wanted to use the newer versions of Torque, I ended up using 2.2 + Torque 3.0 in my current apps. Which adds up to 3 versions of Turbine!
If I had known about all the differences between 2.1,2.2, 3.0, plus fulcrum/stratum, decoupled Torque, etc, then I might not have dived into Turbine quite so quickly. On the other hand, I am here, and confortable with it now! Eric Pugh -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Rall [mailto:dlr@;finemaltcoding.com] Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 12:31 PM To: Turbine Developers List Subject: Re: Turbine community contributions Martin Poeschl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Having 4 options seems to much.... > > definitly! Of course it's too many, just look at the Tomcat goat rodeo. From their left nav: Documentation * Tomcat 3.2 * Tomcat 3.3 * Tomcat 4.0 * Tomcat 4.1 * Tomcat 5.0 I'm a first to say that documentation is a good thing, but....you've got to be kidding me! > after the 2.2 release people should stop using 2.1 > so we have 3 versions left ... still to much!! Right now we have ONE version: 2.1 Once 2.2 is released, we'll again have one version: 2.2 ...and so on. Once a post 2.x version is released, I could see us having more than one version (say, two). Apache httpd is doing this right now with its 1.3 and 2.0 trains, and it makes sense since the versions are so different. Note that httpd 1.3 is in maintainence mode. -- Daniel Rall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
