geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: Geronimo 2.0
Date Sat, 07 Jan 2006 00:22:29 GMT
I agree and do not advocate upgrading releases.  However, Jetty I think is a 
requirements as there is a security hole.  As far as Tomcat is concerned I'll 
defer that decision to you :)

Matt

Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Kevan Miller wrote, On 1/6/2006 8:47 AM:
> 
>>On Jan 6, 2006, at 10:07 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I'll summarize what I think I read.
>>>
>>>HEAD will be 2.0 which includes JEE 5 and other significant work 
>>>(Maven 2 conversion, etc.)
>>>
>>>Branches/1.0 will be where the work for 1.0.x will take place.  It 
>>>would be from this code base we'd branch to a 1.1 when appropriate.
>>>
>>>I'm updating my local copy of the branches/1.0 with a version  change
>>>for Geronimo to 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT as well as updating to Tomcay  5.1.15
>>>and Jetty 5.1.10 to incoroporate the latent fixes.
>>>
>>>I'll build and test to make sure its still working (I'm not going  to
>>>run TCK). and then commit these changes back when I've confirmed 
>>>we're ready to go for 1.0.1.  Does this sound workable?
>>
>>
>>Matt,
>>Tomcat 5.5.15 is stll in Beta. So, I'd hold off just a bit.  Preliminary
>>tests look good. I'm running a more complete test, now.  How about you
>>update version and Jetty. I'll cutover Tomcat when  appropriate...
> 
> 
> Good point Keven.  Matt, I think that we should avoid version upgrades
> for a patch release if we can help it.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Alan
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFDvqTe1xC6qnMLUpYRAuwiAJ0fgGNJpSyxWKop798/EVtM3XLZCgCfQv8J
> QKSjMpmRG4SFbEg052RmpN0=
> =aRfh
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message