Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 8151 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2006 23:27:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Jul 2006 23:27:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 39247 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jul 2006 23:27:28 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 39137 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jul 2006 23:27:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 39123 invoked by uid 99); 30 Jul 2006 23:27:28 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:27:28 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [64.124.179.102] (HELO polatsk.objectstyle.org) (64.124.179.102) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:27:28 -0700 Received: (qmail 11097 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2006 23:27:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ??+?cr??IPv6:::1?) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 30 Jul 2006 23:27:07 -0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) In-Reply-To: References: <44C79027.4090506@odoko.co.uk> <20060727130206.GJ91300@bali.sjc.webweaving.org> <918312fe0607270704i3b4e1232l300b8da22ecab71@mail.gmail.com> <94C8244B-A314-4736-8444-FEE81D15FA37@SUN.com> <5c902b9e0607300958o7fec47ebo6fa497c65d470c7b@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andrus Adamchik Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Incubate Wicket Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 19:27:11 -0400 To: general@incubator.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N I haven't followed the entire thread, but this sounds like what we did in Cayenne. And it did cause some misunderstanding at times regarding our intentions. Let's try to prevent similar misunderstanding in the case of Wicket. The quoted explanation seems quite reasonable to me, except that I would suggest to feature-freeze what you have on your dev branch, make a final release, and from that point only make bugfix releases from that branch (outside Apache) to encourage users to switch to Apache version. This way the old branch will still be "supported". But none of the users should expect that the new features will be ported back to the old releases. Andrus On Jul 30, 2006, at 6:53 PM, Gwyn Evans wrote: > It might be a question of degree, as while the intention is that the > primary development be in the 2.0 branch, there is a roadmap for the > 1.* branch that includes a 1.3 which might be viewed as having "new > features", to support the "old community" which may not be in a > position to switch to the 2.0 branch, as that will be a non-trivial > change. > > That's the release branch that I'm concerned about, and my concern is > that the above, taken literally, could be read as a suggestion to > abandon our existing users... > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org