You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@myfaces.apache.org by Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com> on 2009/05/22 21:10:40 UTC
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Hello,
+1
I would prefer
/trunk -> 2.0
/branches/myfaces-1.1.x
/branches/myfaces-1.2.x
because we are not using cvs anymore
and the path already contains
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
Regards
Bernd
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> actually, I agree with Bernd.
>
> For the following layout:
>
> /trunk -> 2.0
> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
>
> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it trunk)
>
>
> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
>
>
> -Matthias
>
>
> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I would suggest following layout
>>
>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
>> 2.0.x trunk
>>
>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are
>> only in bugfix state.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>>
>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>
>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
>>>> -2.0.x
>>>> -1.1.x
>>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Andrew Robinson <an...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 12:20 AM, Manfred Geiler<ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
> thanks leonardo
> --Manfred
>
> On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 04:24, Leonardo Uribe<lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Myfaces core 1.2.7 and 1.1.7 were released. So we can close this vote and
>> make the necessary changes. Just to note it, after reading all previous
>> emails the suggested layout is this:
>>
>> /trunk -> 2.0
>> /branches/1.1.x
>> /branches/1.2.x
>>
>> If no objections I'll do the necessary changes on svn (note that to do this
>> change we need to update nightly build configuration and I can't help with
>> that).
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Leonardo Uribe
>>
>>
>> 2009/5/28 Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> sure!
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > +1, but just a small suggestion. Right now I'm running the necessary
>>>> > steps
>>>> > for release myfaces core 1.2.7, core 1.1.7, so I would like if it is
>>>> > possible to delay this change after the release.
>>>> >
>>>> > regards
>>>> >
>>>> > Leonardo Uribe
>>>> >
>>>> > 2009/5/27 Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> +1 for sure
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> +1 sounds good to me
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> 2009/5/27 Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>:
>>>> >>> > so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts
>>>> >>> > become
>>>> >>> > trunk ?
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > -Matthias
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann
>>>> >>> > <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> Hello,
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> +1
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> I would prefer
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> /trunk -> 2.0
>>>> >>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
>>>> >>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> because we are not using cvs anymore
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> and the path already contains
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> Regards
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> Bernd
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >>> >> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> For the following layout:
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> /trunk -> 2.0
>>>> >>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
>>>> >>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
>>>> >>> >>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
>>>> >>> >>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it
>>>> >>> >>> trunk)
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> -Matthias
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >>> >>> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> Hello,
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> I would suggest following layout
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
>>>> >>> >>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
>>>> >>> >>>> 2.0.x trunk
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches
>>>> >>> >>>> are
>>>> >>> >>>> only in bugfix state.
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz
>>>> >>> >>>> <we...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>> Hi,
>>>> >>> >>>>>> ...
>>>> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>> >>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
>>>> >>> >>>>>>> branch ...
>>>> >>> >>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
>>>> >>> >>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
>>>> >>> >>>>>> -2.0.x
>>>> >>> >>>>>> -1.1.x
>>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> +1
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> --
>>>> >>> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >>> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >>> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> --
>>>> >>> >>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >>> >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >>> >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > --
>>>> >>> > Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >>> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >>> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com>.
+1
thanks leonardo
--Manfred
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 04:24, Leonardo Uribe<lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Myfaces core 1.2.7 and 1.1.7 were released. So we can close this vote and
> make the necessary changes. Just to note it, after reading all previous
> emails the suggested layout is this:
>
> /trunk -> 2.0
> /branches/1.1.x
> /branches/1.2.x
>
> If no objections I'll do the necessary changes on svn (note that to do this
> change we need to update nightly build configuration and I can't help with
> that).
>
> regards
>
> Leonardo Uribe
>
>
> 2009/5/28 Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> sure!
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > +1, but just a small suggestion. Right now I'm running the necessary
>>> > steps
>>> > for release myfaces core 1.2.7, core 1.1.7, so I would like if it is
>>> > possible to delay this change after the release.
>>> >
>>> > regards
>>> >
>>> > Leonardo Uribe
>>> >
>>> > 2009/5/27 Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>
>>> >>
>>> >> +1 for sure
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> +1 sounds good to me
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 2009/5/27 Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>:
>>> >>> > so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts
>>> >>> > become
>>> >>> > trunk ?
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > -Matthias
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann
>>> >>> > <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >> Hello,
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> +1
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> I would prefer
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> /trunk -> 2.0
>>> >>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
>>> >>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> because we are not using cvs anymore
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> and the path already contains
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> Regards
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> Bernd
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> >> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> For the following layout:
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> /trunk -> 2.0
>>> >>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
>>> >>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
>>> >>> >>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
>>> >>> >>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it
>>> >>> >>> trunk)
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> -Matthias
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> >>> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >>> >>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> Hello,
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> I would suggest following layout
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
>>> >>> >>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
>>> >>> >>>> 2.0.x trunk
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches
>>> >>> >>>> are
>>> >>> >>>> only in bugfix state.
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz
>>> >>> >>>> <we...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>>> Hi,
>>> >>> >>>>>> ...
>>> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>> >>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
>>> >>> >>>>>>> branch ...
>>> >>> >>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
>>> >>> >>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
>>> >>> >>>>>> -2.0.x
>>> >>> >>>>>> -1.1.x
>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>> +1
>>> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> --
>>> >>> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >>> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >>> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> --
>>> >>> >>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >>> >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >>> >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > --
>>> >>> > Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >>> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >>> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >>> >
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
that would be great ! Thx Leo!
-Matthias
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Leonardo Uribe<lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Myfaces core 1.2.7 and 1.1.7 were released. So we can close this vote and
> make the necessary changes. Just to note it, after reading all previous
> emails the suggested layout is this:
>
> /trunk -> 2.0
> /branches/1.1.x
> /branches/1.2.x
>
> If no objections I'll do the necessary changes on svn (note that to do this
> change we need to update nightly build configuration and I can't help with
> that).
>
> regards
>
> Leonardo Uribe
>
>
> 2009/5/28 Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> sure!
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > +1, but just a small suggestion. Right now I'm running the necessary
>>> > steps
>>> > for release myfaces core 1.2.7, core 1.1.7, so I would like if it is
>>> > possible to delay this change after the release.
>>> >
>>> > regards
>>> >
>>> > Leonardo Uribe
>>> >
>>> > 2009/5/27 Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>
>>> >>
>>> >> +1 for sure
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> +1 sounds good to me
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 2009/5/27 Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>:
>>> >>> > so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts
>>> >>> > become
>>> >>> > trunk ?
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > -Matthias
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann
>>> >>> > <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >> Hello,
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> +1
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> I would prefer
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> /trunk -> 2.0
>>> >>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
>>> >>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> because we are not using cvs anymore
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> and the path already contains
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> Regards
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> Bernd
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> >> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> For the following layout:
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> /trunk -> 2.0
>>> >>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
>>> >>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
>>> >>> >>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
>>> >>> >>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it
>>> >>> >>> trunk)
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> -Matthias
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> >>> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >>> >>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> Hello,
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> I would suggest following layout
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
>>> >>> >>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
>>> >>> >>>> 2.0.x trunk
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches
>>> >>> >>>> are
>>> >>> >>>> only in bugfix state.
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz
>>> >>> >>>> <we...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>>> Hi,
>>> >>> >>>>>> ...
>>> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>> >>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
>>> >>> >>>>>>> branch ...
>>> >>> >>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
>>> >>> >>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
>>> >>> >>>>>> -2.0.x
>>> >>> >>>>>> -1.1.x
>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>> +1
>>> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> --
>>> >>> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >>> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >>> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> --
>>> >>> >>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >>> >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >>> >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > --
>>> >>> > Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >>> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >>> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >>> >
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>.
Hi
Myfaces core 1.2.7 and 1.1.7 were released. So we can close this vote and
make the necessary changes. Just to note it, after reading all previous
emails the suggested layout is this:
/trunk -> 2.0
/branches/1.1.x
/branches/1.2.x
If no objections I'll do the necessary changes on svn (note that to do this
change we need to update nightly build configuration and I can't help with
that).
regards
Leonardo Uribe
2009/5/28 Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com>
> +1
>
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> sure!
>>
>> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > +1, but just a small suggestion. Right now I'm running the necessary
>> steps
>> > for release myfaces core 1.2.7, core 1.1.7, so I would like if it is
>> > possible to delay this change after the release.
>> >
>> > regards
>> >
>> > Leonardo Uribe
>> >
>> > 2009/5/27 Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>
>> >>
>> >> +1 for sure
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> +1 sounds good to me
>> >>>
>> >>> 2009/5/27 Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>:
>> >>> > so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts become
>> >>> > trunk ?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > -Matthias
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann
>> >>> > <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
>> >>> >> Hello,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> +1
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I would prefer
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> /trunk -> 2.0
>> >>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
>> >>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> because we are not using cvs anymore
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> and the path already contains
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Regards
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Bernd
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>> >> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> For the following layout:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> /trunk -> 2.0
>> >>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
>> >>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
>> >>> >>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
>> >>> >>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it
>> trunk)
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> -Matthias
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>> >>> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> Hello,
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> I would suggest following layout
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
>> >>> >>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
>> >>> >>>> 2.0.x trunk
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches
>> are
>> >>> >>>> only in bugfix state.
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz <
>> werner.punz@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Hi,
>> >>> >>>>>> ...
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>> >>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
>> >>> >>>>>>> branch ...
>> >>> >>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
>> >>> >>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
>> >>> >>>>>> -2.0.x
>> >>> >>>>>> -1.1.x
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> +1
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> --
>> >>> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >>> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >>> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> --
>> >>> >>> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >>> >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >>> >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>> >
>> >>> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >>> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >>> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >>> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>wrote:
> sure!
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > +1, but just a small suggestion. Right now I'm running the necessary
> steps
> > for release myfaces core 1.2.7, core 1.1.7, so I would like if it is
> > possible to delay this change after the release.
> >
> > regards
> >
> > Leonardo Uribe
> >
> > 2009/5/27 Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>
> >>
> >> +1 for sure
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> +1 sounds good to me
> >>>
> >>> 2009/5/27 Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>:
> >>> > so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts become
> >>> > trunk ?
> >>> >
> >>> > -Matthias
> >>> >
> >>> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann
> >>> > <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
> >>> >> Hello,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> +1
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I would prefer
> >>> >>
> >>> >> /trunk -> 2.0
> >>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
> >>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
> >>> >>
> >>> >> because we are not using cvs anymore
> >>> >>
> >>> >> and the path already contains
> >>> >>
> >>> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
> >>> >>
> >>> >> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Regards
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Bernd
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
> >>> >> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> >>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> For the following layout:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> /trunk -> 2.0
> >>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
> >>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
> >>> >>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
> >>> >>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it trunk)
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> -Matthias
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
> >>> >>> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> >>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Hello,
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> I would suggest following layout
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
> >>> >>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
> >>> >>>> 2.0.x trunk
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are
> >>> >>>> only in bugfix state.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz <
> werner.punz@gmail.com>
> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>> >>>>>> ...
> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
> >>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
> >>> >>>>>>> branch ...
> >>> >>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
> >>> >>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
> >>> >>>>>> -2.0.x
> >>> >>>>>> -1.1.x
> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>>>> +1
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> --
> >>> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> --
> >>> >>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>> >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>> >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > --
> >>> > Matthias Wessendorf
> >>> >
> >>> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
sure!
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1, but just a small suggestion. Right now I'm running the necessary steps
> for release myfaces core 1.2.7, core 1.1.7, so I would like if it is
> possible to delay this change after the release.
>
> regards
>
> Leonardo Uribe
>
> 2009/5/27 Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>
>>
>> +1 for sure
>>
>> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 sounds good to me
>>>
>>> 2009/5/27 Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>:
>>> > so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts become
>>> > trunk ?
>>> >
>>> > -Matthias
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann
>>> > <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
>>> >> Hello,
>>> >>
>>> >> +1
>>> >>
>>> >> I would prefer
>>> >>
>>> >> /trunk -> 2.0
>>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
>>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
>>> >>
>>> >> because we are not using cvs anymore
>>> >>
>>> >> and the path already contains
>>> >>
>>> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
>>> >>
>>> >> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards
>>> >>
>>> >> Bernd
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> For the following layout:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> /trunk -> 2.0
>>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
>>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
>>> >>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
>>> >>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it trunk)
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> -Matthias
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Hello,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I would suggest following layout
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
>>> >>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
>>> >>>> 2.0.x trunk
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are
>>> >>>> only in bugfix state.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Hi,
>>> >>>>>> ...
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
>>> >>>>>>> branch ...
>>> >>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
>>> >>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
>>> >>>>>> -2.0.x
>>> >>>>>> -1.1.x
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>> +1
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> --
>>> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>>
>>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >
>>> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >
>>
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>.
+1, but just a small suggestion. Right now I'm running the necessary steps
for release myfaces core 1.2.7, core 1.1.7, so I would like if it is
possible to delay this change after the release.
regards
Leonardo Uribe
2009/5/27 Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>
> +1 for sure
>
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> +1 sounds good to me
>>
>> 2009/5/27 Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>:
>> > so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts become
>> trunk ?
>> >
>> > -Matthias
>> >
>> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann
>> > <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> I would prefer
>> >>
>> >> /trunk -> 2.0
>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
>> >> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
>> >>
>> >> because we are not using cvs anymore
>> >>
>> >> and the path already contains
>> >>
>> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
>> >>
>> >> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >>
>> >> Bernd
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>> matzew@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
>> >>>
>> >>> For the following layout:
>> >>>
>> >>> /trunk -> 2.0
>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
>> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
>> >>>
>> >>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
>> >>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
>> >>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it trunk)
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> -Matthias
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>> matzew@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hello,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I would suggest following layout
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
>> >>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
>> >>>> 2.0.x trunk
>> >>>>
>> >>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are
>> >>>> only in bugfix state.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>> ...
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
>> branch ...
>> >>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
>> >>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
>> >>>>>> -2.0.x
>> >>>>>> -1.1.x
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> +1
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>>>
>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>>
>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Matthias Wessendorf
>> >
>> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>.
+1 for sure
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 sounds good to me
>
> 2009/5/27 Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>:
> > so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts become
> trunk ?
> >
> > -Matthias
> >
> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann
> > <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> I would prefer
> >>
> >> /trunk -> 2.0
> >> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
> >> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
> >>
> >> because we are not using cvs anymore
> >>
> >> and the path already contains
> >>
> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
> >>
> >> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Bernd
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
> >>>
> >>> For the following layout:
> >>>
> >>> /trunk -> 2.0
> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
> >>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
> >>>
> >>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
> >>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
> >>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it trunk)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -Matthias
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <
> matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>> I would suggest following layout
> >>>>
> >>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
> >>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
> >>>> 2.0.x trunk
> >>>>
> >>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are
> >>>> only in bugfix state.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
> branch ...
> >>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
> >>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
> >>>>>> -2.0.x
> >>>>>> -1.1.x
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>>>
> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>>
> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> >
> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com>.
+1 sounds good to me
2009/5/27 Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>:
> so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts become trunk ?
>
> -Matthias
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann
> <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I would prefer
>>
>> /trunk -> 2.0
>> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
>> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
>>
>> because we are not using cvs anymore
>>
>> and the path already contains
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
>>
>> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Bernd
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
>>>
>>> For the following layout:
>>>
>>> /trunk -> 2.0
>>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
>>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
>>>
>>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
>>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
>>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it trunk)
>>>
>>>
>>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
>>>
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I would suggest following layout
>>>>
>>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
>>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
>>>> 2.0.x trunk
>>>>
>>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are
>>>> only in bugfix state.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
>>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
>>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
>>>>>> -2.0.x
>>>>>> -1.1.x
>>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout
(was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
so, there are no objections in making the MyFaces 2.0 efforts become trunk ?
-Matthias
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann
<be...@atanion.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> +1
>
> I would prefer
>
> /trunk -> 2.0
> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
>
> because we are not using cvs anymore
>
> and the path already contains
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
>
> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
>
> Regards
>
> Bernd
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
>>
>> For the following layout:
>>
>> /trunk -> 2.0
>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
>>
>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it trunk)
>>
>>
>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
>>
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I would suggest following layout
>>>
>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
>>> 2.0.x trunk
>>>
>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are
>>> only in bugfix state.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>>>
>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>>
>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
>>>>> -2.0.x
>>>>> -1.1.x
>>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [VOTE] SVN structure change (was: Re: [MyFaces CORE] SVN layout (was: Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...))
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <mw...@gmail.com>.
Ah. Good point!
Sent from my iPod.
On 22.05.2009, at 21:10, Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> +1
>
> I would prefer
>
> /trunk -> 2.0
> /branches/myfaces-1.1.x
> /branches/myfaces-1.2.x
>
> because we are not using cvs anymore
>
> and the path already contains
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/
>
> maybe we can omit the 'myfaces' in the branch name.
>
> Regards
>
> Bernd
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org
> > wrote:
>> actually, I agree with Bernd.
>>
>> For the following layout:
>>
>> /trunk -> 2.0
>> /branches/myfaces_1_1_x
>> /branches/myfaces_1_2_x
>>
>> Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk:
>> -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec)
>> -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it trunk)
>>
>>
>> So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout"
>>
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org
>> > wrote:
>>> from Bernd, on a different thread:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I would suggest following layout
>>>
>>> 1.1.x branch/1.1.x
>>> 1.2.x branch/1.2.x
>>> 2.0.x trunk
>>>
>>> because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are
>>> only in bugfix state.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz
>>> <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>>>
>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
>>>>>> branch ...
>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>>
>>>>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk"
>>>>> And the following efforts are on a branch:
>>>>> -2.0.x
>>>>> -1.1.x
>>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>