qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Marnie McCormack" <marnie.mccorm...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [RESULT] Qpid M2 Release
Date Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:51:28 GMT
Ah. Good news and bad, imho. Happy to include Ruby but a little concerned
that it's not going to be release-able for reasons other than the code :-)

Regards,
Marnie


On 3/15/07, Carl Trieloff <cctrieloff@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> Marnie,
>
> 3 +1's means that the vote carries, and as we have no -1's or 0's all
> the components in the vote
> should be included in M2. i.e. Ruby carried also so it must be included.
>
> Regards,
> Carl.
>
>
> Marnie McCormack wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Thanks for your votes and input on the M2 Release vote thread.
> >
> > I have now tallied up the votes cast, and they look like this:
> >
> > [ +8 ] M2 Release inc Java, C++, .NET
> > [ +6 ] Python client (plus 2 abstentions)
> > [ +3 ] Ruby client (plus 5 abstentions)
> >
> > My reading of the discussions thus far is that the python is fairly well
> > used and thus maintained. The Ruby seems a bit behind this in status and
> > will shortly be subject to some additional effort (hopefully from
> Kevin).
> >
> > Thus, I'd conclude that we should concentrate our efforts on an M2 which
> > only includes:
> >
> > Java Broker (with a caveat on the clustered broker code)
> > Java Client
> > C++ Broker
> > C++ Client
> > .NET Client
> > Python Client
> >
> > I hope that this tallies up with the group consensus. I'll email
> > separately
> > on release branching and management.
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Marnie
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message