[Friday] Re: Tomahawk 1.1.5 release plans?

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

well... not in muc.
only "schnitzel Wiener art", which sucks. the original is the better :-))
hefeweizen kills the JSF.next :)

-M

On 2/23/07, Jeff Bischoff <jb...@klkurz.com> wrote:
> I saw that post at the time, but figured it was the result of too much
> doppelbock and wienerschnitzel. ;)
>
> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > Well... there was a meeting in munich, during the october fest...
> > and they discussed that...
> >
> > http://wiki.java.net/bin/view/Projects/JSFDaysMunich2006
> >
> > *snip*
> > Version synchronization. JSF 2.0 renamed JSF 6 to go with Java EE 6.
> >
> > perhaps it was the beer ;)))
> >
> >
> > On 2/23/07, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> >> 6.0?  Seriously?
> >>
> >> Dennis Byrne
> >>
> >> On 2/23/07, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> > there was a wiki page which says that they want to have the next
> >> > version of jsf (2.0)
> >> > named 6.0
> >> > so... I am not really seeing any reason to go from myfaces 1.2 to a
> >> 6 ...
> >> >
> >> > :-)
> >> >
> >> > On 2/23/07, Dennis Byrne < dennis@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >    JSF 1.1 -> MyFaces 1.x
> >> > > >    JSF 1.2 -> MyFaces 2.x
> >> > >
> >> > > I'd rather keep the release numbers in sync with the spec numbers.
> >> > >
> >> > > 1.1 -> 1.1.x,
> >> > > 1.2 -> 1.2.x
> >> > >
> >> > > > Paul Spencer
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> >> > > > > we sould do the same for core
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > next is 1.5.0
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > and JSF 1.2 stuff should be changed to 2.0.0
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On 2/23/07, Manfred Geiler <manfred.geiler@gmail.com > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >> 1.5.0 or 1.6.0. One is as good as the other IMO.
> >> > > > >> You mean 1.6.0 is better because it does not "match" the
> >> 1.1.5 of
> >> > > > >> current core?
> >> > > > >> I think Martin suggested 1.5.0 because it would be in the
> >> style of
> >> > > > >> Tomcat 5.0.x vs Tomcat 5.5.x, right?
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> --Manfred
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> On 2/23/07, Paul Spencer < paulsp@apache.org> wrote:
> >> > > > >> > If the version of Tomahawk is not tied to the version of
> >> MyFaces,
> >> > > then
> >> > > > >> > how about the NEXT version of Tomahawk be 1.6?
> >> > > > >> >
> >> > > > >> > This would allow Tomahawk, like Tobago, to be version
> >> independently
> >> > > > >> of MyFaces.
> >> > > > >> >
> >> > > > >> > Paul Spencer
> >> > > > >> >
> >> > > > >> > Martin Marinschek wrote:
> >> > > > >> > > slightly too late, but 1.1.5 would have been my option as
> >> well.
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> > > other option: 1.5 - and let tomahawk and impl version
> >> numbers
> >> get
> >> > > > >> out of
> >> > > > >> > > sync.
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> > > regards,
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> > > Martin
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> > > On 2/23/07, Manfred Geiler < manfred.geiler@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> > >> Ok, thanks for your feedback.
> >> > > > >> > >> Branch 1.1.5 created.
> >> > > > >> > >>
> >> > > > >> > >> --Manfred
> >> > > > >> > >>
> >> > > > >> > >>
> >> > > > >> > >> On 2/23/07, Wendy Smoak < wsmoak@gmail.com > wrote:
> >> > > > >> > >> > On 2/23/07, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > >> > >> > > The new tomahawk release number is a trade-off.
> >> > > > >> > >> > > We must decide between
> >> > > > >> > >> > >  - releasing tomahawk 1.1.4 which is not compatible to
> >> core
> >> > > > >> 1.1.4 and
> >> > > > >> > >> > > therefore might confuse users
> >> > > > >> > >> > >  - skipping tomahawk 1.1.4, stay in sync with core and
> >> have a
> >> > > > >> > >> tomahawk
> >> > > > >> > >> > > 1.1.5 that is 100% compatible to the current core 1.1.5
> >> > > > >> > >> >
> >> > > > >> > >> > +1 for Tomahawk 1.1.5 this time around, which will be
> >> > > > >> compatible with
> >> > > > >> > >> > Core 1.1.5.
> >> > > > >> > >> >
> >> > > > >> > >> > (There is plenty of information in the archives if anyone
> >> asks
> >> > > > >> "what
> >> > > > >> > >> > happened" to 1.1.4.  As Paul points out, Tomcat skips
> >> version
> >> > > > >> numbers
> >> > > > >> > >> > in their public release series.)
> >> > > > >> > >> >
> >> > > > >> > >> > --
> >> > > > >> > >> > Wendy
> >> > > > >> > >> >
> >> > > > >> > >>
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> >
> >> > > > >> >
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Dennis Byrne
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Matthias Wessendorf
> >> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >> >
> >> > further stuff:
> >> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> >> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Dennis Byrne
> >
> >
>
>
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com