Re: [jibx-users] 1.0 Release?

[Eitan S. <eit...@u2...>]

i am for switching away from a beta versioning structure to a 1.0/2.0 
structure.
it makes much more sense to me and is more in line with the way other 
projects
function.

/ eitan

On Feb 18, 2005, at 12:54 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:

> I've been working on some extensions to Xsd2Jibx and the core JiBX 
> code that support using abstract <mapping>s as the equivalent of 
> schema types. This doesn't allow everything I'd like to support, but 
> at least gives a basic level of support that looks pretty usable (and 
> which can be generated by Xsd2Jibx). I'm also planning to clean up as 
> many of the beta 3c bugs over the next couple of weeks as possible.
>
> At that point I'm considering making the new release 1.0 RC1, and 
> officially making what had been beta 4 the new first beta for JiBX 
> 2.0. Once people have had a chance to test the RC1 release I'll then 
> go ahead and make it the official first production release of JiBX.
>
> This is largely due to the magnitude of the changes I'm including in 
> beta 4, which have grown over time to include an increasing number of 
> user-visible changes. I'm not completely happy with making beta 3c the 
> basis for a production release, since as I've said before there are 
> some problems I have no intention of resolving in the beta 3c 
> codebase. But I think the quality of the code is good enough to 
> justify a production release label, since even though you can 
> construct some bindings which do not work as expected these generally 
> result in clear-cut failures rather than subtle problems which will 
> only show up in deployed systems.
>
> How do you, as users of JiBX, feel about this? If I get a significant 
> number of objections to this approach I'll stick with the old plan of 
> pushing through the megachanges in beta 4.
>
>  - Dennis