Hi Emmanuel,

On 9/4/06, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@iktek.com> wrote:
Hi gang,

we have started some discussion relative to ADS 2.0 on the ML, and it
could be good to be able to distinguish this thread from the other ones.

I suggest that we start all mails relative to ADS 2.0 by [ADS 2.0]

btw, this ADS-2.0 is not scheduled for a close future, let's say it's
myuch more an experimental zone where we put some ideas we can't
implement in 1.0 - but that we may put in 1.1 or 1.2 ...)

I don't think we can't experiment with 1.1 or any further releases.  I thought we are rewriting ApacheDS completely from the number 2.0.

What we really need to do is to extract important design issues of ApacheDS from a various level (API, architecture, ...) and resolve them one by one in decending order of the impact.  I think this effort should make what 1.1 is.  Yep, as we discussed long before, 1.1 is a unstable branch.  So basically we shouldn't have any limitation on changing anything critical.  Resolving a big design issue which causes a lot of refactoring and rewriting should be done as earliest as possible in a unstable branch.

Trustin
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP key fingerprints:
* E167 E6AF E73A CBCE EE41  4A29 544D DE48 FE95 4E7E
* B693 628E 6047 4F8F CFA4  455E 1C62 A7DC 0255 ECA6