james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Bagnara <apa...@bago.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] next-major from trunk will be 3.0
Date Fri, 03 Aug 2007 15:52:59 GMT
Danny Angus ha scritto:
> On 8/3/07, Stefano Bagnara <apache@bago.org> wrote:
>> I also agree that it added confusion: I had a clear view on what
>> next-minor and next-major was and at that time I thought it was clear to
>> everyone (I'm used to labels to identify software sprints). But the
>> facts proved my believing was wrong.
> I think that was the problem, not that it was a bad idea, but that we
> didn't all have the same understanding. We use labels in this way at
> work too, to great effect, somehow it just didn't catch on here.

FWIW, even now that we have 3.0 instead of next-major, I don't have an
understanding of people preferences/ideas about the future of JAMES. Not
that my understanding is important now, but I hope someone will better
collect such moods/opinions.

It "seems" we now agree we need a 3.0M1, this would be already a great
step: I really hope to see a 3.0M1 out there, soon!

My opinion is unchanged since next-major: imho we can have a release
even tomorrow, maybe we should consider whether it is better to release
another version of the handlerapi (the current trunk) or it is better to
release 3.0M1 using the 2.3.1 handlerapi, or it is better to release one
of the experimental handlerapi.

I'm not a fan of the current handlerapi as I think it introduce
incompatibilities with the experimental 2.3.x support and it does not
provide a sufficient platform for the future (so I expect to see further
changes there sooner or later), but for the major goal of a release I'd
sacrifice almost anything, so I'm fine with any code will be there.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

View raw message