[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Remy Maucherat wrote: > > >>I'll adopt a hard line stance, since I think it is the only way to avoid >>the situation with dependencies to get out of hand (where we bundle >>custom builds of every dependent module). >> >>We have to use only release components in a release build. >>If there are too many issues, then it is our fault for relying on broken >>components, and those dependencies must be removed. > > > I agree that using only stable releases is the ideal solution. > Except I don't think it scales. > > > >>>I'm not saying we should use HEAD, but the 'stable' branch of >>>each component we depend on, where fixes are made. >> >>I don't agree, I'd like to use the latest stable version. > > > I'd like that too. > > I just don't think it works.
At least for jakarta components we should try to make it work. > > > Well, let's close this issue - the release manager should do the build > with whatever he likes, we vote on the end result. If you can get the > stars to align on the release date and use only stable versions - great. There are 2 points: - Making reliable releases. - Having reproduceable build. I am going to update the build.xml to help for the second (as commons-logging 1.0.1 is still not released). I am also thinking that if the problem is in commons-logging we should help to make the needed release hapend. > > > Costin > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
