commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <>
Subject Re: [JEXL] Jexl 2.1?
Date Fri, 02 Dec 2011 17:52:15 GMT
+1. to release early, release often. Go for v3, seems simplest. If someone
really wants fixes in 2.x, then you release from the branch.


On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 12:27 PM, henrib <> wrote:

> I've done the same thing and been pushing JEXL snapshots for sometime to
> avoid the unpleasant moment, so unpleasant that I've procrastinated enough
> to now have to consider alternatives.
> I find disturbing that committers fear to release and that goodwill to
> share
> features and code is killed by the process that should help publish them -
> not oppose them!
> I agree that a "release early, release often" scheme would help but I've no
> idea how to achieve this without a "release faster" mean.
> However, I ultimately suspect that the vested interest of some in promoting
> a hard, difficult and lengthy process relates to how their bills get payed
> and by whom; there is a huge difference in those of us doing this as a
> "goodwill hobby" - so to speak - because we feel it is good ethics to
> contribute back and those who make a living from it. Can't blame them for
> making sure their fees stay high by ensuring "hobbyists" don't get too
> efficient! (just kidding :-))
> Cheers,
> Henrib
> --
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

E-Mail: |
JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>
Spring Batch in Action: <>

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message