Re: [Springframework-developer] Current release plan - why delay package renaming?

[Rod J. <rod...@in...>]

> Wow, there seems to be an overwhelming consensus to change the package
names now. Well, then let there be org.springframework :-) The reasoning
behind delaying this to 1.0 RC initially was to keep consistency for current
users. On the other hand, there's the strong argument of a growing user
base: An early change will affect less people.

We all seem agreed.

> Of course we can still keep 0.9.1 as next version number. Calling our
current status 1.0 beta1 wouldn't be absurd though, just look at at the
eager release policies of Jakarta or Hibernate. Note that for any subsequent
version like 2.0 there will only be the beta/RC-option. So, opinion poll:
stay with 0.9.1 or eagerly move to 1.0 beta1 now? I'm inclined to go for the
latter.

I agree with Thomas. 1.0 beta 1 implies a feature freeze to me, and I don't
think we're there yet. The pace of change is certainly slowing and hopefully
future changes will be backward-compatible, but I think we need 0.9.1 before
1.0 beta 1.
>
> BTW, what does everybody think regarding a new CVS module
"main1"/"main10", or "spring1"/"spring10", or the like? The Hibernate team
works with a "hibernate2" module currently, having the 1.0 tree in
"hibernate", so creating a new module seems appropriate to me.

spring10.

> To avoid unnecessary further delays, I urge everybody to commit all
dangling changes. If we agree on the module and its name, I'd like to create
it on Monday and import a clean org.springframework version. Then we should
test that with current apps, and if everything succeeds, we should be able
to publish the release at the end of the week.

I'm done until we release, although I would like to be able to get back into
the codebase no later than the end of the week.

Regards,
Rod