commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From robert burrell donkin <>
Subject Re: digester 2.0 [WAS Re: [digester] [PROPOSAL] More pattern matching flexibility]
Date Thu, 05 Sep 2002 17:48:01 GMT
On Thursday, September 5, 2002, at 08:23 AM, Christopher Lenz wrote:

> robert burrell donkin wrote:
>> i'm pretty happy with the way that this is heading but maybe it'd be 
>> easier for more people to review these changes and suggest improvements 
>> if we had them in cvs. maybe a branch is the right way to go forward. 
>> (we can merge back once everyone's happy with the changes.)
>> comments?
> Branching would be a good idea... just to clarify: you'd create a branch 
> where big changes (like my patch) would go, while smaller changes and 
> bugfixing continues in HEAD? I thought the usual approach was the other 
> way around, where you'd create a branch for maintainence (say 
> DIGESTER_1_BRANCH), and let the big changes happen in HEAD. At least that'
> s how it works in Tomcat, Slide and Struts.

this would be a small branch not a big branch :)

scott and craig are probably going to be busy for a while (at least the 
tomcat release is over). i'd really prefer it if they were able to take a 
look at the proposals before we make a definite decision about 2.0. on the 
other hand, i don't want to stop the proposal being developed.

so, the branch would be for developing a possible future digester 2.0 
(without making an absolute decision yet) rather than back branching a 
maintenance version.

- robert

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message