Re: Why the "unpublished" suffix?

• Previous message: Ari Maniatis (JIRA): "[JIRA] Closed: (CAY-659) Comments / Descriptions for Attributes"
• In reply to: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Why the "unpublished" suffix?"
• Next in thread: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Why the "unpublished" suffix?"
• Reply: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Why the "unpublished" suffix?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Actually, I hadn't thought of that. But, given that Java6 introduced new
javax.sql API methods, that could very well be the case.

Should 1.4's code just merge over to 1.5 then?

-- 
Kevin
On 10/24/07 3:39 AM, "Andrus Adamchik" <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
> I think no - somehow I feel there will be "cayenne-jdk1.6-
> unpublished" in a not so distant future.
> 
> Andrus
> 
> 
> On Oct 24, 2007, at 10:28 AM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 24/10/2007, at 2:15 AM, Kevin Menard wrote:
>> 
>>> It's to differentiate between assemblies that are published as
>>> JARs and
>>> those that are used simply to build larger assemblies that are
>>> published as
>>> JARs.
>> 
>> Now that 1.4 and 1.5 are being merged, do we want to rename that
>> project cayenne-core?

• Next message: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Why the "unpublished" suffix?"
• Previous message: Ari Maniatis (JIRA): "[JIRA] Closed: (CAY-659) Comments / Descriptions for Attributes"
• In reply to: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Why the "unpublished" suffix?"
• Next in thread: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Why the "unpublished" suffix?"
• Reply: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Why the "unpublished" suffix?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Oct 24 2007 - 08:09:27 EDT