Johan Compagner wrote:
> The feeling i get from the mail below is that incubator releases
> are not really meant for all end users.. You really only want
> the users that really knows that it is an incubator release.
> But for me wicket-2.0 will be a full release a real release that
> every user
On 8/3/06, Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> ...BTW, if it's useful I'd be happy to help as an additional mentor...
...We welcome you. There can never be enough mentors.
ok, so feel free to add my name to the list!
-Bertrand
-
The feeling i get from the mail below is that incubator releases are not
really meant for all end users.. You really only want the users that really
knows that it is an incubator release.
But for me wicket-2.0 will be a full release a real release that every user
of
wicket should be able to use j
Dion,
> What point is there in having something incubated if there are no users?
We're talking about a balance, and most specifically about ensuring that
only users who have made a specific and informed decision are using the code
while it is still in the Incubator. The Apache brand has a value
This seems a little ridiculous.
What point is there in having something incubated if there are no users?
What sort of a community would it be that didn't accept feedback and
evolve based on that feedback?
How many users are willing to wait 6+ months to use something just
because it is undergoing
> i would much rather see wicket-1.2.2 rather then
> wicket-incubating-1.2.2 as a release. to me incubating says "not ready for
> production use".
Keep in mind that the Incubator has very little interest in users using the
code. Our focus is entirely on developers, and users are "interesting" onl
On 7/27/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As releases marked as incubated will probably
raise an eyebrow or two, what are our options?...
Seen from another angle, releases marked "incubating" are a great way
to help make your community aware of what's happening. Along with a
we have updated the versions section of our proposal to reflect this. please
review and lets discuss, basically we would like to incubate 1.3 as well as
2.0.
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/WicketProposal
-Igor
On 7/31/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You summarized my though
You summarized my thoughts exactly :-)
Martijn
On 7/31/06, Gwyn Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'll start by saying I'm not deeply involved in the roadmap plans, so
pay more attention to the other devs, but this seems a possible
position to me, i.e.
All source hosted at ASF, lists & web mo
You say "One of those is to be able to build releases for our
community": do you mean that you are unhappy with the stated need to
release from Apache and mark with "Incubating" (i.e. you want to release
1.x from SF)? Or if you were to bring the 1.x branches over to Apache,
would you be prepared t
Sorry for this lengthy response, but I got a negative vibe from
several reactions to this thread and I feel a need to vent my
concerns.
First I am a big fan of Apache and the Apache community. I think that
the way Apache works is a great example of how a community effort can
produce great softwar
That's the Wicket side of it - anyone have any idea about how long the
incubation period might be expected to take?
/Gwyn
On 29/07/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Time scale for Wicket 2.0 is to start out releasing betas within two
months. We plan to finish Wicket In Action the n
Time scale for Wicket 2.0 is to start out releasing betas within two
months. We plan to finish Wicket In Action the next few months - say
october - and we really want the 2.0 API stabilized by then, as we're
covering 2.0. The major changes we had in mind for 2.0 have been in
for a few months now,
Well, my view would be that I'd like to keep the 1.2.x stream as
wicket-1.2.x, whereas I'd be happy enough for the 1.3 stream to be
wicket-incubating-1.3*. We'd expect the users to check the changes
from 1.2 to 1.3, so having the "incubating" there (and explained in
the release not) seems fine to
imho, i would much rather see wicket-1.2.2 rather then
wicket-incubating-1.2.2 as a release. to me incubating says "not ready for
production use". it might mean something different in the apache context
but
we cant expect all our existing users or those who stumble upon wicket for
the first time t
* release elsewhere, making sure to give things an appropriately different
name and making sure both users and the incubator PMC understand what
it
all means and what is going on
imho, i would much rather see wicket-1.2.2 rather then
wicket-incubating-1.2.2 as a release. to me incubating
Hey Martijn, guys,
I'd really like to encourage you to take a look at how different
established projects that joined apache through the incubator have
handled this (spamassassin, stdcxx. roller, ofbiz, ...), as well as
some of the discussion about this "releases from incubating projects"
policy an
BTW Thanks everyone for the support!
On the release note:
We are very committed to support our community even when we're
undergoing incubation. This would typically mean that we might need to
release Wicket versions. As releases marked as incubated will probably
raise an eyebrow or two, what are
18 matches
Mail list logo
