On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> wrote: > On 2009-03-16, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I've not looked into this yet, but I think we can have two Lang builds >> in Gump, one for the new stuff, and another for other projects. > > Easily, yes. > > Is there a branch that should be used by project that are likely to be > broken by the changes in lang?
The 2.4 tag. Having it fail was useful for me with the String Taglib; the code needed to move off of deprecated methods. Personally I think failing is good and we'll learn lots from it. I'd like to keep trunk until the consumer community indicate it's a pain point. For example making a lang-backcompat jar for enum and exceptions might be a better choice and getting projects to add a dependency on that in gump. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
