Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <43C14219.7060609@toolazydogs.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 08:47:21 -0800
From: "Alan D. Cabrera" <list@toolazydogs.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: Geronimo 2.0
References: <43BD63E6.1080605@toolazydogs.com>
	 <7b3355cb0601051543r1364a1acpa7ba2e4add90b2e0@mail.gmail.com>
	 <43BDB6B5.7090704@toolazydogs.com>
	 <7b3355cb0601051626w404a3069rf1d6a6a70d3303ee@mail.gmail.com>
	 <43BDE335.2060601@gmail.com> <1b5bfeb50601060105t539fa083r@mail.gmail.com>
 <43BE87CC.4030607@hogstrom.org> <43BEA49A.80806@toolazydogs.com>
 <2343B10A-AAA7-423D-BC2E-6DDBEAC2897C@yahoo.com>
 <17BD9967-67CA-4AB6-8457-F16D7F511E23@visi.com>
In-Reply-To: <17BD9967-67CA-4AB6-8457-F16D7F511E23@visi.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

David Blevins wrote, On 1/6/2006 3:24 PM:
> 
> On Jan 6, 2006, at 11:10 AM, David Jencks wrote:
> 
>> Either I don't understand what is being proposed or I think it is a 
>> recipe for disaster.
>>
>> My past experience with open source projects leads me to believe  that
>> having more than one main development area that is leading to  a
>> release is likely to cause only confusion, not progress towards 
>> functionality.
>>
>> In my opinion if we call head 2.0 and start adding JEE 5 features  to
>> it, there will never be any more j2ee 1.4 releases with added 
>> functionality.  We will have a couple bug fix 1.0 releases, then a 
>> year or so while we try to finish JEE 5.  I don't think this is 
>> acceptable.
>>
> 
> Amen!
> 
> We can't go from two years of development on 1.x with little to no  user
> interaction then abandon it after the first release and go back  into
> the development hole.  We need to follow through on Geronimo 1.x  for a
> few release cycles, get some user feedback, learn the lessons  we need
> to learn for a while, *then* start Geronimo 2.0.
> 
> Now is not the time to turn our focus to the next shinny ball, now is 
> the time to focus on users of 1.x as they will need our dedication 
> before they can bring it into production.


Dave,

I don't think that anyone is advocating the abandonment of 1.x.  I think
we are merely acknowledging the fact that a lot of people will want to
work on, to use your choice of words, the next shinny ball.  You can't
control what people want to work on.  We can control how it's done so
that we can minimized the impact on 1.x branch.

This was the reason for my initial email.


Regards,
Alan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDwUIZ1xC6qnMLUpYRArSVAJ4wvd7ZbQhqdkuVnsF0lUaI7lByOACeN0Vu
VRh2v9fqbdQWwYlXiFHCHow=
=n376
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----