db-ojb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Matthew Baird" <Matthew.Ba...@motiva.com>
Subject RE: OJB usability - part 1 of 5: versioning policy
Date Thu, 16 Oct 2003 14:48:36 GMT
although CVS is the de facto standard for source code control, I would love for us to use Perforce,
which is free for open source projects. If we did that, we could *easily* maintain multiple
branches, plus the performance is much better than CVS. Is there any chance for us to do this?

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: oliver.matz@ppi.de [mailto:oliver.matz@ppi.de] 
	Sent: Thu 10/16/2003 1:44 AM 
	To: ojb-dev@db.apache.org 
	Subject: RE: OJB usability - part 1 of 5: versioning policy

	Hello all,
	Chris, thank you very much for your constructive critisimn
	and valuable comments. 
	I agree with Chris' concern about the versioning
	policy.  I do not care so much about the actual version
	number.  The essential point is to have a CVS branch or
	subproject for maintenance in order to reach a stable
	> -----Original Message-----
	> From: Armin Waibel [mailto:armin@code-au-lait.de]
	> > But, the release notes themselves, illustrate well that OJB
	> > is, in fact, not a
	> > release candidate at all. OJB is at best still in a BETA status.
	> Currently Oliver Matz try to find User to split
	> a OJB 1.0 branch with bug fix support. See
	> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.ojb.user/9288/
	So far, there are two replies to my appeal to contribute
	to a maintenance version.  One on the list and one directed
	to my email account.
	I still hope to find some more!
	To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
	For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org

View raw message