czw., 25 lis 2021 o 15:57 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> napisał(a): > Am I reading the archives correctly when I conclude there has never been > an ASF release of Commons OGNL of any version? (snapshots don't count)
Yes, no stable release of Commons OGNL. > Why will migrating changes from 3.x be any easier if the code is hosted > elsewhere? I won't be migrating them, I'll continue to support the 3.x line (and 4.x at some point) based on the Github version but under SML organisation (it's a two clicks process). When I opted to move OGNL under the ASF umbrella I thought it would be easier to maintain the code and release it and in the beginning it looked like this. Yet, after some time, the both versions of code started to diverge and now it's almost impossible to merge the changes back from 3.x into Commons-OGNL (it should be possible the other way around). Also it's a way easier for me to release a new version based on GH than to perform the same process at ASF. > A cursory review of GitHub stats does show that the old 3.x has been > more active. It looks like you have been doing most of the work. Why do > you think 3.x has seen more activity than 4.x? As mentioned above, a faster release cycle (in most cases it depends just on me, less bureaucracy), I'm able to release a new version and test it in Struts the same day. Also there are other non-ASF projects which depend on the 3.x and it's easier for them to discuss/fix problems just using GH (my assumption) than create tickets in JIRA and then PRs in GH. Regards -- Łukasz + 48 606 323 122 http://www.lenart.org.pl/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
