My take is deprecate the old package names (org.tigris.*), add the new
package name (org.apache.subversion.*), and remove the deprecated
names whenever we go to 2.0.
I'm moderately ambivalent on whether this happens for 1.7 or if can
wait for 1.8...
I don't see much else we can do under our versioning policies. -- justin
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> See below...
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 17:32
> Subject: Re: Discussion: graduating Subversion
> To: general_at_incubator.apache.org
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 17:21, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell_at_sun.com> wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 12:49 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> Before calling for a vote to graduate Subversion, I figured it prudent
>>> to have a discussion first. I believe Subversion is quite ready (and
>>> has been, but the holidays and whatnot kept me from sending this
>>> Any thoughts on why Subversion should NOT graduate now?
>> As I've said earlier, I'd like to know how you plan to resolve the question
>> of in which package you propose to ship the Java components. IIUC, you use
>> org.tigris in the distributions to date.
> I don't think we have a specific plan for that yet, and I know we were
> looking for "Apache Best Practices" on that, but not sure if we found
> any there.
> I'll bring that back to the dev list.
Received on 2010-01-25 23:36:32 CET