Jeanfrancois,
I think it is a good idea. However I would consider real hard before
deciding to break
backwards compatibility. Also where is the bulk of the development going
to be? IF it is
in the 2.0 area with minimal maintenance / changes in the 1.x codebase
for v3 etc then I would
make 1.x the branch and let the development continue on 2.0. Again it
depends on what the
real plan is for grizzly 1.x is going forward and what kind of resources
are going to be behind it.
Thanks
- Rajiv
Jeanfrancois Arcand wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose a new branch for our upcoming Grizzly2.0
> works. For the next couple of month, I would like to allow full
> innovation on that branch with no restriction (no backward
> compatibility requirement, new features, contributions, new ideas,
> etc.). Innovation added to that branch can possibly be ported back to
> the 1.x branch, but It should be case by case. Then once we think we
> have something we want to officially release Grizzly2.0 release, we
> can then decide what to do with backward compatibility, etc.
>
> Personally I would like to start experimenting with NIO.2 on that branch.
>
> What people thinks?
>
> Thanks
>
> -- Jeanfrancois
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_grizzly.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_grizzly.dev.java.net