You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@turbine.apache.org by mp...@marmot.at on 2001/07/24 19:13:22 UTC
[vote]2.x release
situation:
there are many bug-fixes in cvs which should land in a 2.x release.
on the other hand some stuff (castor, freemarker, ...) should be deprecated in
2.x to follow our deprecation rules (or we must add all the stuff to 3.0 :-( )
options:
A) a 2.1.1 release with all the bug-fixes without deprecation + a 2.2 release
with deprecations (doesn't make sense, does it??)
B) a 2.2 release with bugfixes + deprecations
there will be no api changes in 2.2 only deprecations -> all 2.1 apps would work
fine, but their might be some warnings at compile time
i'll be on vacation from 4. - 17. august and i would like to have a 2.x release
before my vacation.
PLEASE VOTE!!
martin
ps: my vote A +0, B +1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [vote]2.x release
Posted by Leon Messerschmidt <le...@opticode.co.za>.
> B) a 2.2 release with bugfixes + deprecations
> there will be no api changes in 2.2 only deprecations -> all 2.1 apps
would work
> fine, but their might be some warnings at compile time
+1
~ Leon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [vote]2.x release
Posted by Colin Chalmers <co...@maxware.nl>.
+1 for option B
/Colin
> situation:
> there are many bug-fixes in cvs which should land in a 2.x release.
> on the other hand some stuff (castor, freemarker, ...) should be
deprecated in
> 2.x to follow our deprecation rules (or we must add all the stuff to 3.0
:-( )
>
> options:
> A) a 2.1.1 release with all the bug-fixes without deprecation + a 2.2
release
> with deprecations (doesn't make sense, does it??)
>
> B) a 2.2 release with bugfixes + deprecations
> there will be no api changes in 2.2 only deprecations -> all 2.1 apps
would work
> fine, but their might be some warnings at compile time
>
>
> i'll be on vacation from 4. - 17. august and i would like to have a 2.x
release
> before my vacation.
>
> PLEASE VOTE!!
>
> martin
>
> ps: my vote A +0, B +1
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [vote]2.x release
Posted by josh lucas <jo...@stonecottage.com>.
mpoeschl@marmot.at wrote:
>
> situation:
> there are many bug-fixes in cvs which should land in a 2.x release.
> on the other hand some stuff (castor, freemarker, ...) should be deprecated in
> 2.x to follow our deprecation rules (or we must add all the stuff to 3.0 :-( )
>
> options:
> A) a 2.1.1 release with all the bug-fixes without deprecation + a 2.2 release
> with deprecations (doesn't make sense, does it??)
>
+1, I think this does make sense and follows the current deprecation
policy as I read it. This way, people will get their bug fixes as well
as get warnings that things are deprecated so that when they are gone in
3.0, there are no complaints.
This doesn't mean that these releases can't come closely after one
another since it would make sense to get them both out the door as
quickly as possible.
> B) a 2.2 release with bugfixes + deprecations
> there will be no api changes in 2.2 only deprecations -> all 2.1 apps would work
> fine, but their might be some warnings at compile time
>
-1, for the main reason that combining these will add confusion IMO.
josh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [vote]2.x release
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.
mpoeschl@marmot.at writes:
> B) a 2.2 release with bugfixes + deprecations
> there will be no api changes in 2.2 only deprecations -> all 2.1 apps would work
> fine, but their might be some warnings at compile time
+1
Martin is obviously willing to put some serious effort into this, so
let's give him our support.
Daniel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [vote]2.x release
Posted by John McNally <jm...@collab.net>.
I think A is the proper way to go. Although it does not make sense for
someone to upgrade from 2.1 to 2.2 if there are not many bugfixes in the
2.2 release. It provides a clearer start point for those just starting
an application.
But B is easier on developers (of turbine) as there is less porting of
bugfixes across branches.
So I will live with either one.
john mcnally
mpoeschl@marmot.at wrote:
>
> situation:
> there are many bug-fixes in cvs which should land in a 2.x release.
> on the other hand some stuff (castor, freemarker, ...) should be deprecated in
> 2.x to follow our deprecation rules (or we must add all the stuff to 3.0 :-( )
>
> options:
> A) a 2.1.1 release with all the bug-fixes without deprecation + a 2.2 release
> with deprecations (doesn't make sense, does it??)
>
> B) a 2.2 release with bugfixes + deprecations
> there will be no api changes in 2.2 only deprecations -> all 2.1 apps would work
> fine, but their might be some warnings at compile time
>
> i'll be on vacation from 4. - 17. august and i would like to have a 2.x release
> before my vacation.
>
> PLEASE VOTE!!
>
> martin
>
> ps: my vote A +0, B +1
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: results: [vote]2.x release
Posted by mp...@marmot.at.
Zitiere josh lucas <jo...@stonecottage.com>:
> mpoeschl@marmot.at wrote:
> >
> > A: 2.1.1 bug-fix release
> > -1 : 2
> > +1 : 1
> >
> > B: 2.2 bug-fix + deprecation release
> > -1 : 2 (fedor, josh)
> > +1 : 7
> >
> > C: breaking our deprecation rules
> > -1 : 1 (martin)
> > +1 : 1
> >
> > it's very bad to define rules and break them 2 weeks later!!!
> >
> > B is most preffered, but we have 2 -1!!
> > fedor, josh could you please think about it?!?
> > i think deprecation warnings are not that bad!
> > most people will never see them because i don't know if anyone is
> using castor,
> > freemarker or webmacro ...
> >
> >
>
> i will remove my -1 on B if we have the assurance that 2.2 will be
> released before 3.0 (i'm sure it will but I want to say it) and if the
> deprecation is documented by more than just compiler warnings.
no problem!
thanx
martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: results: [vote]2.x release
Posted by josh lucas <jo...@stonecottage.com>.
mpoeschl@marmot.at wrote:
>
> A: 2.1.1 bug-fix release
> -1 : 2
> +1 : 1
>
> B: 2.2 bug-fix + deprecation release
> -1 : 2 (fedor, josh)
> +1 : 7
>
> C: breaking our deprecation rules
> -1 : 1 (martin)
> +1 : 1
>
> it's very bad to define rules and break them 2 weeks later!!!
>
> B is most preffered, but we have 2 -1!!
> fedor, josh could you please think about it?!?
> i think deprecation warnings are not that bad!
> most people will never see them because i don't know if anyone is using castor,
> freemarker or webmacro ...
>
>
i will remove my -1 on B if we have the assurance that 2.2 will be
released before 3.0 (i'm sure it will but I want to say it) and if the
deprecation is documented by more than just compiler warnings.
josh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: results: [vote]2.x release
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.
mpoeschl@marmot.at writes:
> A: 2.1.1 bug-fix release
> -1 : 2
> +1 : 1
>
> B: 2.2 bug-fix + deprecation release
> -1 : 2 (fedor, josh)
> +1 : 7
>
> C: breaking our deprecation rules
> -1 : 1 (martin)
> +1 : 1
>
> it's very bad to define rules and break them 2 weeks later!!!
>
>
> B is most preffered, but we have 2 -1!!
> fedor, josh could you please think about it?!?
> i think deprecation warnings are not that bad!
> most people will never see them because i don't know if anyone is using castor,
> freemarker or webmacro ...
Deprecation warnings are definitely the way to go. And if the release
contains bug fixes also, what's the big deal? It's not like new
features are being added. This is how we've been doing it in Helm.
Dan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
results: [vote]2.x release
Posted by mp...@marmot.at.
A: 2.1.1 bug-fix release
-1 : 2
+1 : 1
B: 2.2 bug-fix + deprecation release
-1 : 2 (fedor, josh)
+1 : 7
C: breaking our deprecation rules
-1 : 1 (martin)
+1 : 1
it's very bad to define rules and break them 2 weeks later!!!
B is most preffered, but we have 2 -1!!
fedor, josh could you please think about it?!?
i think deprecation warnings are not that bad!
most people will never see them because i don't know if anyone is using castor,
freemarker or webmacro ...
martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [vote]2.x release
Posted by Jason van Zyl <jv...@apache.org>.
On 7/24/01 1:13 PM, "mpoeschl@marmot.at" <mp...@marmot.at> wrote:
> situation:
> there are many bug-fixes in cvs which should land in a 2.x release.
> on the other hand some stuff (castor, freemarker, ...) should be deprecated in
> 2.x to follow our deprecation rules (or we must add all the stuff to 3.0 :-( )
>
> options:
> A) a 2.1.1 release with all the bug-fixes without deprecation + a 2.2 release
> with deprecations (doesn't make sense, does it??)
>
> B) a 2.2 release with bugfixes + deprecations
> there will be no api changes in 2.2 only deprecations -> all 2.1 apps would
> work
> fine, but their might be some warnings at compile time
+1
There is just no getting around the fact that some of the code in
a 2.1 app can not be adaptered in 3.0. I think it is acceptable to
change the API (actually we're just forming one) over major version
changes.
> i'll be on vacation from 4. - 17. august and i would like to have a 2.x
> release
> before my vacation.
>
> PLEASE VOTE!!
>
> martin
>
> ps: my vote A +0, B +1
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: turbine-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: turbine-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org