incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gwyn Evans" <gwyn.ev...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Re: [PROPOSAL] Incubate Wicket
Date Fri, 28 Jul 2006 08:18:49 GMT
Well, my view would be that I'd like to keep the 1.2.x stream as
wicket-1.2.x, whereas I'd be happy enough for the 1.3 stream to be
wicket-incubating-1.3*.  We'd expect the users to check the changes
from 1.2 to 1.3, so having the "incubating" there (and explained in
the release not) seems fine to me.

As for 2.0, we may well want to release wicket-incubating-2.0-RCx or
similar, but I'd have hoped that we'd be out and able to do
apache-wicket-2.0 by the time we finalise 2.0.  (Anyone any idea what
sort of timescales we might be expecting, by the way).

/Gwyn

On 27/07/06, Johan Compagner <jcompagner@gmail.com> wrote:
> > imho, i would much rather see wicket-1.2.2 rather then
> > wicket-incubating-1.2.2 as a release. to me incubating says "not ready for
> > production use". it might mean something different in the apache context
> > but
> > we cant expect all our existing users or those who stumble upon wicket for
> > the first time to enlighten themselves.
> >
> > so i would rather release on our existing home at sf.net
>
>
> Yes i would also rather see a normal wicket-1.2.2.jar  when we release an
> update
> to 1.2.x then a incubator name in it.  1.2.2 is a finished release and
> incubator
> doesn't say finished to me and that i guess goes for a lot of people.
>
> So i am +1 for option 2.
>
> And for 2.0 we should then really wait for getting out of incubator. Because
> the same rules apply to me. I am not pro for a final release with incubator
> in the name.
>
> johan
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message