qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carl Trieloff <cctriel...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Changing the release numbering scheme (was Re: [VOTE] Version Numbers)
Date Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:49:28 GMT
Aidan Skinner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Carl Trieloff <cctrieloff@redhat.com> wrote:
>> If we could agree to get 0-10 into the Java Broker in a timely fashion and
>> then change then
>> go to 1.0, I am fine with that. However, the 'M' is a pain and if we don't
>> reach that point for
>> the next release I would prefer to go to 0.5 for the next release.
> I don't think that adding 0-10 support to the Java broker is the only
> step necessary before we declare ourselves 1.0. I'm not sure that
> there's a consensus around what would be Qpid 1.0 just now.

I don't care when we decide to call it 1.0, but a would like to get rid 
of the 'M'

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