Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 99970 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2006 05:49:18 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2006 05:49:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 97856 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2006 05:49:17 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 97164 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2006 05:49:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 97150 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2006 05:49:15 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Feb 2006 21:49:15 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [63.208.196.171] (HELO outbound.mailhop.org) (63.208.196.171) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Feb 2006 21:49:14 -0800 Received: from cpe-071-070-252-011.nc.res.rr.com ([71.70.252.11] helo=[192.168.1.5]) by outbound.mailhop.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.51) id 1F4XKv-000CtJ-LO for dev@geronimo.apache.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:48:53 -0500 X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS X-Originating-IP: 71.70.252.11 X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.mailhop.org/outbound/abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: hogndos Message-ID: <43E19D46.2090104@hogstrom.org> Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:48:54 -0500 From: Matt Hogstrom User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Macintosh/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] 1.0.1 Release and the configId issue Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N There was some discussion on Irc earlier this week about the issue related to plans having to be changed due to module versions changing. This is clearly going to be a significant issues for customers as they will have to re-work all their plans on incremental server changes. Although these will most likely be tolerated in the short-term this is a serious shortcoming in the current design that needs to be addressed. During the discussion it was asserted tha given the magnitude of the change to the format of the plans and changes to G it was not appropriate for make this change in a maintenance release. The collective wisdom was to declare in the release notes this issue and give the user guidance with the assurance this is being addressed in 1.1 (or there abouts). Since there has been a lot of discussion about this already and it being such a significant issue I thought I'd request a vote to see where we stand. [ ] +1 Document issue in release notes and defer fix to 1.1 [ ] 0 Not that important one way or another [ ] -1 This is an issue that must be resolved in the 1.0.x branch [ ] Other...provide your reasons.