IMHO, given that the 1.2 line has been in the works for some time, and
any effort to repackage the class tree will almost certainly lead to
changes ( trivial bug fixes, etc), why not stick to the org.objectstyle
packaging for the 1.2 final release, and move on ot org.apache from
there?
another consideration in the naming scheme is to align the version to
specific java specs. ie: release 1.5 corresponds to ( and provides an
implementation compatible with) java 1.5.
i've seen this in a couple of projects, and might present an opportunity
to shake off legacy dependencies for pre java 5 ( the multiple source
projects never sat well with me to be honest..)
in the end, so long as the numbers keep going up, i spose it doesnt
really matter, but i for one wouldnt like to see a 1.2 release with
org.objectstyle and another from org.apache
just my 2c.
j
ps: nice work on the move to incubator, i really hope this leads to
greater exposure of this excellent framework to a wider audience!
On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 17:53 +0400, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> From the purely practical standpoint, when 1.2 goes final, I wonder
> if we should keep the maintenance branch on SourceForge. This way
> we'll have a clean cutoff point.
>
> I think releasing org.objectstyle.cayenne.* stuff from Apache is
> confusing (if not legally wrong). I know other incubating projects
> are doing that (roller), but at some point we will graduate from the
> Incubator... and will still want to maintain 1.2.x branch at that time.
>
> So once we get setup..pache, I suggest to initially only migrate the
> new stuff (i.e. JPA), and move the core framework when we are ready
> to change the package names.
>
> Does it make sense? I think we are pretty close to the 1.2 RC when
> the total code freeze starts, and then we can actually branch it out.
>
> Andrus
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Apr 09 2006 - 05:51:58 EDT