From: Stefan K. <ste...@un...> - 2006-01-18 11:50:00
|
Hi all, I think it would be time to release the jcp21 branch and to merge it back= . Any=20 opinions on this? Btw, it really seems we got the applet in a decent stat= e. Stefan --=20 Stefan Kuhn M. A. Cologne University BioInformatics Center (http://www.cubic.uni-koeln.de) Z=C3=BClpicher Str. 47, 50674 Cologne Tel: +49(0)221-470-7428 Fax: +49 (0) 221-470-7786 My public PGP key is available at http://pgp.mit.edu |
From: Stefan K. <ste...@un...> - 2006-02-23 17:08:29
|
Dear co-developers, there has been the more or less finished jcp for quite a while. The last=20 problem was the licence of the jh.jar. I offered solutions for this, and = I=20 would also implement the helpbrowser via html. It seems nobody cares abou= t=20 this to an extent to answer yes or no. I consider this bad style, and I=20 repeat that I would implement this solution, but only if we do a release = of=20 jcp from the jcp21 branch after it. If somebody objects to this, he shoul= d at=20 least spent the effort to write an email. Stefan --=20 Stefan Kuhn M. A. Cologne University BioInformatics Center (http://www.cubic.uni-koeln.de) Z=C3=BClpicher Str. 47, 50674 Cologne Tel: +49(0)221-470-7428 Fax: +49 (0) 221-470-7786 My public PGP key is available at http://pgp.mit.edu |
From: Egon W. <eg...@us...> - 2006-02-23 17:27:35
|
On Thursday 23 February 2006 18:40, Stefan Kuhn wrote: > there has been the more or less finished jcp for quite a while. The last > problem was the licence of the jh.jar. I offered solutions for this, and I > would also implement the helpbrowser via html. It seems nobody cares about > this to an extent to answer yes or no. Yes, I'm fine with this solution. It's what we had before. > I consider this bad style, and I > repeat that I would implement this solution, but only if we do a release of > jcp from the jcp21 branch after it. If somebody objects to this, he should > at least spent the effort to write an email. Ok, this will be the 2.2.0 release, correct? What will happen after this? Will the changes be ported to HEAD again? Who will do this? Or will we keep releasing 2.2.x from the jcp21 branch? Or both? Egon -- eg...@us... Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/ GPG: 1024D/D6336BA6 |
From: Egon W. <eg...@us...> - 2006-01-18 15:20:30
|
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 13:20, Stefan Kuhn wrote: > I think it would be time to release the jcp21 branch and to merge it back. > Any opinions on this? Btw, it really seems we got the applet in a decent > state. Very good. I'm in favor of a release. The current version scheme prescribes it as the first 2.2 release, hence 2.2.0. The next development version should be 2.3.0. Egon -- eg...@us... Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/ GPG: 1024D/D6336BA6 |