On 31/03/07, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2007 17:45, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> We consider this release to be for resolving legal issues only, and
> will not make it available to the general public. The reasoning behind
> this is that we are still working on some major changes that need time
> to mature in these weeks. These changes are a direct result of the
> decision by the Wicket community to discontinue development on trunk
> (a full discussion can be found here [3]). As such we discourage our
> users to use this release, because it will not give them a stable
> platform to work with.
I think the Incubator needs to know a bit more background around the Wicket
struggles.
1. When Wicket came to Incubator, I got the idea that 1.x was for bug fixes
and 2.0 is the new incompatible trunk for development at ASF.
Not quite - the plans were for 1.2.x to be the bug-fixes, 1.3 to be an
Apache release as wicket.* and 2.0 to be the Apache release as
org.apache.wicket.*
2. The 2.0 development is hitting major resistence, for more factors than just
change of package names to org.apache.wicket.
That's misleading - the change of package names to org.apache.wicket.*
isn't an issue at all - What's been discussed is the wisdom of
carrying on with the single feature that effectively means that there
would be two, very dissimilar streams of development.
3. 2.0 development is sort of cancelled, and work is starting to back port
most features in 2.0 to the 1.x lineage.
Now, what is happening to the org.apache.wicket naming requirement of classes?
See here[1] for the vote to apply the rename to the 1.3 stream, which
looks to happen shortly.
This release request is still using "package wicket.*". How do you plan to
handle this, to satisfy both the Incubator namespace requirement and users
being upset over incompatibilities?
For the first point, the 1.3 release was always due to be a wicket.*
release, so we understood that using the wicket.* namespace wasn't a
show-stopper - as for the second, this 1.3 release is more to validate
the legal release aspects rather than a release to end-users, so that,
combined with notes such as this[2] and the fact that the mean that it
shouldn't be a problem. Note that the release is a 1.2 -> 1.3 change,
with all that normally implies, rather than an incremental 1.n.m
release, where we would attempt to keep drop-in compatability.
/Gwyn
[1] http://snipurl.com/1en4c
[2] http://snipurl.com/1en4g
--
Download Wicket 1.2.5 now! - http://wicketframework.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
