+ 1
This sounds like a good plan to me. Now I am a bit biased here in
that our company is a committed user of Cayenne 3.0 classic mode.
regards Malcolm Edgar
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
>
> On Jun 18, 2008, at 4:47 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
>
>> Since there is no copyright over the concept of JPA itself, could this be
>> satisfied by simply ensuring that nothing mentions that Cayenne is JPA
>> compliant or partially-compliant?
>
> It's worse than that. If you read the license in the JPA PDF, we are not
> allowed to ship anything that implements javax.persistence interfaces unless
> we are certified.
>
>
>>> * (plus lots of smaller features and bug fixes) :
>>
>> * How about the generified SelectQuery? I know it was discussed to death
>> and there was no 100% clean method, but it might be nice to get in given 3.0
>> is the Java 5 release.
>
> I started playing with it and got stuck a bit... Didn't like the stuff that
> came out. I am +1 on having it in 3.0 if we get the design that we like.
>
>> Maybe now is a good time to create 4.0 and 3.1 milestones and start
>> triaging tasks into those?
>
> You mean like a Wiki page (not an SVN branch)? Yeah sure we can do that.
>
>
>>> * We EOL 1.2 (SourceForge) and 2.0 (Apache) branches.
>>
>> Might be good to support the 2.0 branch for critical bug fixes for 12
>> months? Doesn't look like there will be any given its current stable nature,
>> but it might create confidence.
>
> Fine with me. As long as we EOL 1.2 and don't have to deal with SourceForge
> anymore.
>
>> I suspect given your goals above, a few beta releases, etc we might be
>> aiming for a final 3.0 release toward the end of the year.
>
> I won't be giving any time predictions, but I think end of 2008 is likely
> too optimistic. Maybe in the future we'll implement better release scope
> management to ensure shorter cycles, but now we have too many loose ends.
>
> Andrus
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Jun 18 2008 - 18:59:52 EDT