RE: Is pluto moving toward a release?

["David H. DeWolf" <da...@vivare.com>]

Not to be create confusion, but when we talk 
about "releases", we may want to be a little
more specific.  If I'm not mistaken, as an 
incubator project, we can't actually create a
release without requesting permission.  My 
guess is that within this thread, the term
"1.0 release", was not necessarily meant to mean
an actual binary release. That sai, I thought
we should clarify for those that may not be
as familiar with the release process.

http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases%0
D%0A

On that note, it's probably time to start
putting together a roadmap and schedule so
that visitors are familiar with the current 
status and where we're going.

Anyone have an rolling "todo" list?  When
can we get the pluto site updated with the
new mavenized docs so that we look a little
more active?

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Hepper [mailto:sthepper@hursley.ibm.com] 
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 2:42 PM
To: pluto-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: Re: Is pluto moving toward a release?


It depends what you expect from a 1.0 release. The release we dontated 
was the 1.0 release as it was the valid reference implementation for JSR

168. We only overlooked in the build.xml to put the version to 1.0 
before committing it to the apache CVS.

Stefan

Craig M. Doremus wrote:
> Greetings!
> 
> Upon updating pluto from CVS this morning, I noticed the version
property in build/build.xml was changed about a week ago from
0.1-dev-unreleased to 1.0? Does this mean that a 1.0 binary release of
pluto is forthcoming? If not, are there any educated guesses as to when
the pluto code base will be stable enough for a 1.0 release?
> TIA
> /Craig 
> 

Re: Is pluto moving toward a release?

[Stefan Hepper <st...@hursley.ibm.com>]

I'm for creating a 1.0 release with binaries based on the initial drop, 
as this was the drop that got certified as JSR 168 reference 
implementation. This way everyone can at least download the certified RI 
without compiling it on their own.

I'll sent a list that I have in a separate mail.

Stefan

David H. DeWolf wrote:
> Not to be create confusion, but when we talk 
> about "releases", we may want to be a little
> more specific.  If I'm not mistaken, as an 
> incubator project, we can't actually create a
> release without requesting permission.  My 
> guess is that within this thread, the term
> "1.0 release", was not necessarily meant to mean
> an actual binary release. That sai, I thought
> we should clarify for those that may not be
> as familiar with the release process.
> 
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases%0
> D%0A
> 
> On that note, it's probably time to start
> putting together a roadmap and schedule so
> that visitors are familiar with the current 
> status and where we're going.
> 
> Anyone have an rolling "todo" list?  When
> can we get the pluto site updated with the
> new mavenized docs so that we look a little
> more active?
> 
> David
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Hepper [mailto:sthepper@hursley.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 2:42 PM
> To: pluto-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Is pluto moving toward a release?
> 
> 
> It depends what you expect from a 1.0 release. The release we dontated 
> was the 1.0 release as it was the valid reference implementation for JSR
> 
> 168. We only overlooked in the build.xml to put the version to 1.0 
> before committing it to the apache CVS.
> 
> Stefan
> 
> Craig M. Doremus wrote:
> 
>>Greetings!
>>
>>Upon updating pluto from CVS this morning, I noticed the version
> 
> property in build/build.xml was changed about a week ago from
> 0.1-dev-unreleased to 1.0? Does this mean that a 1.0 binary release of
> pluto is forthcoming? If not, are there any educated guesses as to when
> the pluto code base will be stable enough for a 1.0 release?
> 
>>TIA
>>/Craig 
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Patch] Corrected simple spelling error

[James Nguyen <se...@duskyblue.net>]

Sorry. Here's the correct patch file. For some reason WebSphere Studio 
generated the patch file incorrectly.

James Nguyen

At 11:02 PM 12/1/2003 -0800, you wrote:
>There appears to be a problem with this patch, since it looks like it's
>changing all of the line ends in the files, rather than just fixing the
>spelling error in question. You might want to recreate the patch so that
>it *only* fixes the spelling error.
>
>--
>Martin Cooper
>
>
>On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, James Nguyen wrote:
>
> >
> > >I know this is just nitpicking, but there's a simple spelling error in a
> > >string constant and key name. Included is a patch generated from WSAD.
> > >Correct me if they are suppose to be spelled as is.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > James Nguyen
> >


James Nguyen
I/T Professional
600 Anton Boulevard - Suite 360
Costa Mesa, California 92626

"Cogito ergo sum"
         -Rene Descartes

Re: [Patch] Corrected simple spelling error

[Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org>]

There appears to be a problem with this patch, since it looks like it's
changing all of the line ends in the files, rather than just fixing the
spelling error in question. You might want to recreate the patch so that
it *only* fixes the spelling error.

--
Martin Cooper


On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, James Nguyen wrote:

>
> >I know this is just nitpicking, but there's a simple spelling error in a
> >string constant and key name. Included is a patch generated from WSAD.
> >Correct me if they are suppose to be spelled as is.
>
>
> Thanks,
> James Nguyen
>

[Patch] Corrected simple spelling error

[James Nguyen <se...@duskyblue.net>]

>I know this is just nitpicking, but there's a simple spelling error in a 
>string constant and key name. Included is a patch generated from WSAD. 
>Correct me if they are suppose to be spelled as is.


Thanks,
James Nguyen