Le 24/07/2010 04:41, Bill Barker a écrit :
>
>
> --
> From: "Phil Steitz"
> Sent: Friday, July 23, 2010 5:42 PM
> To: "Commons Developers List"
> Subject: Re: clirr for MATH-389
>
>> Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> Intentional but still a mistake
> >> We all agree that the [math] API needs work. If we cut more frequent
> >> major releases, we can evolve the API. Lets do that.
> >>
> >
> > +1 on creating a 2.2 branch and concentrating [math] on 3.0.
>
> I would really much like to have a new version out this year, I need
> some changes fo
My IDE shows some findbugs warnings on the code. Should we clean this
stuff up first?
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Context:
>
> Releasing a beta version of the Lang 3.0 API for user feedback.
> There aren't any major API changes expected, unless the community
> raises
Still a bit worried about having an incorrect version of release notes.
But everything else (artifacts, build, site) looks good, so here is my +1.
Oliver
Am 23.07.2010 21:33, schrieb Henri Yandell:
Context:
Releasing a beta version of the Lang 3.0 API for user feedback.
There aren't any maj
No. :)
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 6:51 AM, James Carman
wrote:
> My IDE shows some findbugs warnings on the code. Should we clean this
> stuff up first?
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> Context:
>>
>> Releasing a beta version of the Lang 3.0 API for user feedback.
>> T
Damn - sorry for missing that.
_Cancelling_ the vote - I think it's worth the extra small effort to
get the release notes in there, especially so we can explain the
'beta' concept.
Hen
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Oliver Heger
wrote:
> Still a bit worried about having an incorrect version o
