Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 22:48:51 +0000
Subject: Re: [Jelly] Pressing on with core release
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482)
From: robert burrell donkin <robertburrelldonkin@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <E81F716D-438D-11D7-BBFB-000393753BDE@adeptra.com>
Message-Id: <262A1D4E-4393-11D7-B438-003065DC754C@blueyonder.co.uk>

On Tuesday, February 18, 2003, at 10:11 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

> On Tuesday, February 18, 2003, at 03:25 PM, Morgan Delagrange wrote:
>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> So, what's the next step?  I think we need to fix or
>> at least document the remaining bugs, maybe figure out
>> how to structure the distribution.  Should we do an
>> official beta release now, or should we skip that step
>> and go right to RC?
>>
>> My only big release concern at the moment is the state
>> of our dependencies.  Some of those dependencies (e.g.
>> Jexl) look like they are early beta.  Is it OK to
>> release Jelly with some beta dependencies, and if not
>> what are we going to do about it?
>
> I'm working on the big problems in Jexl now - I would think that you have 
> to just go with it as beta until they are resolved.

i think that it'd be ok to go with a jexl beta providing that it was a 
proper beta release rather than just a SNAPSHOT.

on the subject of dependencies, i've just finished beanutils 1.6.1 which 
(hopefully) should work ok with jelly and so you shouldn't need to rely on 
a beanutils SNAPSHOT.

- robert


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org