MyFaces is looking to use the ConfigParser() in 1.1.0 Is their an estimate on the release of 1.1.0?

[Paul Spencer <pa...@apache.org>]

The MyFaces team is looking to use the ConfigParser() which was added in
version 1.1.0. Is their an estimate on the release of 1.1.0?


Paul Spencer

Re: MyFaces is looking to use the ConfigParser() in 1.1.0 Is their an estimate on the release of 1.1.0?

[Paul Spencer <pa...@apache.org>]

Craig,
Thanks for the quick reply.  I agree with you statement about test
dependencies not being as critical as a runtime dependency.  As to
the time frame, June is fine.

FYI: So far the ConfigParser is working well :)

Paul Spencer

Craig McClanahan wrote:
> On 5/17/07, Paul Spencer <pa...@apache.org> wrote:
>> The MyFaces team is looking to use the ConfigParser() which was added in
>> version 1.1.0. Is their an estimate on the release of 1.1.0?
> 
> A 1.1 release is very unlikely during May (I'm in my second week of
> three conferences in a row), but more likely in June when I'll have
> some time to catch up on the outstanding bug reports -- personally,
> I'm happy enough with the new features we've implemented to have bugs
> be the only important blocker at this point.  On the other hand, you
> could probably make a case that a *test* dependency is not quite so
> critical as a runtime dependency would be.  And, we're certainly not
> interested in destabilizing changes in these APIs, since it would mess
> up all of our tests as well.
> 
> Craig
> 
>>
>>
>> Paul Spencer
>>
>>
>>
> 

Re: MyFaces is looking to use the ConfigParser() in 1.1.0 Is their an estimate on the release of 1.1.0?

[Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>]

On 5/17/07, Paul Spencer <pa...@apache.org> wrote:
> The MyFaces team is looking to use the ConfigParser() which was added in
> version 1.1.0. Is their an estimate on the release of 1.1.0?

A 1.1 release is very unlikely during May (I'm in my second week of
three conferences in a row), but more likely in June when I'll have
some time to catch up on the outstanding bug reports -- personally,
I'm happy enough with the new features we've implemented to have bugs
be the only important blocker at this point.  On the other hand, you
could probably make a case that a *test* dependency is not quite so
critical as a runtime dependency would be.  And, we're certainly not
interested in destabilizing changes in these APIs, since it would mess
up all of our tests as well.

Craig

>
>
> Paul Spencer
>
>
>