You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@velocity.apache.org by Christopher Schultz <ch...@christopherschultz.net> on 2012/01/31 18:26:09 UTC
Re: [OT] tools-2.1-dev and engine-2.x
Nathan,
On 4/13/11 12:03 PM, Nathan Bubna wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Claude Brisson <cl...@renegat.net> wrote:
>> On 2011-04-13 11:57, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Claude
>>>
>>> 2011/4/13 Claude Brisson<cl...@renegat.net>
> ...
>>
>> Then I'd vote for the first solution: have tools-2.1 require engine-2.x once
>> it's released. After all, we can backport important changes to tools-2.0.x.
> ...
>
> I agree. At this point, tools is evolving slowly, and what time i do
> have to develop velocity will be largely spent on engine 2. I think
> it is fine to release fixes to Tools in the 2.0.x branch and have 2.1
> be where we drop support for both Tools 1 config and Engine 1.
Can you confirm that your expectation is that Tools 2.0.x will have at
least one more release? I was getting ready to make a few changes and I
want to make sure that I commit to the right place. If 2.0.x is
essentially dead, then I'll only commit to trunk and leave 2.0.x alone.
Thanks,
-chris
Re: [OT] tools-2.1-dev and engine-2.x
Posted by Nathan Bubna <nb...@gmail.com>.
I have no active plans to release 2.0.x.
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Christopher Schultz
<ch...@christopherschultz.net> wrote:
> Nathan,
>
> On 1/31/12 12:39 PM, Nathan Bubna wrote:
>> Do you want a new 2.0 release? I can't recall offhand if there is/was
>> a particular need or demand for one.
>
> No, but I was going to make some changes that I need fixing :)
>
> So, the question is whether to commit to trunk and back-port to 2.0.x,
> or not bother back-porting because 2.0.x is essentially done.
>
> Thanks,
> -chris
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@velocity.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@velocity.apache.org
Re: [OT] tools-2.1-dev and engine-2.x
Posted by Christopher Schultz <ch...@christopherschultz.net>.
Nathan,
On 1/31/12 12:39 PM, Nathan Bubna wrote:
> Do you want a new 2.0 release? I can't recall offhand if there is/was
> a particular need or demand for one.
No, but I was going to make some changes that I need fixing :)
So, the question is whether to commit to trunk and back-port to 2.0.x,
or not bother back-porting because 2.0.x is essentially done.
Thanks,
-chris
Re: [OT] tools-2.1-dev and engine-2.x
Posted by Nathan Bubna <nb...@gmail.com>.
Do you want a new 2.0 release? I can't recall offhand if there is/was
a particular need or demand for one.
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Christopher Schultz
<ch...@christopherschultz.net> wrote:
> Nathan,
>
> On 4/13/11 12:03 PM, Nathan Bubna wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Claude Brisson <cl...@renegat.net> wrote:
>>> On 2011-04-13 11:57, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Claude
>>>>
>>>> 2011/4/13 Claude Brisson<cl...@renegat.net>
>> ...
>>>
>>> Then I'd vote for the first solution: have tools-2.1 require engine-2.x once
>>> it's released. After all, we can backport important changes to tools-2.0.x.
>> ...
>>
>> I agree. At this point, tools is evolving slowly, and what time i do
>> have to develop velocity will be largely spent on engine 2. I think
>> it is fine to release fixes to Tools in the 2.0.x branch and have 2.1
>> be where we drop support for both Tools 1 config and Engine 1.
>
> Can you confirm that your expectation is that Tools 2.0.x will have at
> least one more release? I was getting ready to make a few changes and I
> want to make sure that I commit to the right place. If 2.0.x is
> essentially dead, then I'll only commit to trunk and leave 2.0.x alone.
>
> Thanks,
> -chris
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@velocity.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@velocity.apache.org