cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Berin Loritsch <blorit...@d-haven.org>
Subject Re: 2.2 vs 3.0, or 2.2 then 3.0?
Date Mon, 05 Dec 2005 14:04:17 GMT
Upayavira wrote:

>So, 2.2 = important, and 3.0 = important. Both.
>
>We need to avoid discussions, implications, emotions, etc that suggest
>otherwise.
>  
>

Right.  If any of that has gone on, I'm sure its unintentional.  If 
memory serves me correctly, Cocoon 2 was written as a branch, and 
Maintenance was happening on Cocoon 1 for a while.

There did come a time when work stopped on Cocoon 1, but that was after 
Cocoon 2 was released.

Basically, new/exciting stuff should go in Cocoon 3, and touch ups to 
Cocoon 2 until Cocoon 3 is ready for prime time.


Mime
View raw message