Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>
>> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>>
>>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>>
>>>> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't recall that m2 will be ready when 2.2 is out. If m2 is not
>>>>> ready, it should not delay the release. So, I suggest slight change
>>>>> of plan:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> According to the m2 dev list, there will be a m2 final next week (if
>>>> I'm
>>>> not mistaken). But of course a final version might not mean that
>>>> everything works the way we want it :)
>>>
>>>
>>> Bad choice of words from me :-) I rather meant, our next build system
>>> which is based on m2 could be not ready for 2.2 release.
>>>
>>> IIRC, 2.2m1 is due in 1 week or so :-) and m2 build is far from being
>>> implemented. My point is, delays in m2 build system implementation
>>> should not affect 2.2 releases, and if necessary, it can be easily
>>> done as part of 2.3.
>>
>>
>> I think a build/deployment system is a must as soon as we reach the
>> "release candidate" phase of 2.2. Currently the best bet is M2. Do you
>> see any alternatives that could be implemented faster?
>
>
> 2.1 is using Ant build for years now; I don't see a problem using it a
> bit longer if it means release sooner.
ok, I think we're talking about differnt things. Anyway - the only missing thing
so that the M2 build is equivalent to the Ant build is the include/exclude
mechanism, isn't it?
--
Reinhard Pötz Independent Consultant, Trainer & (IT)-Coach
{Software Engineering, Open Source, Web Applications, Apache Cocoon}
web(log): http://www.poetz.cc
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|