---
Salut,
====================================
Ricardo Borillo Domenech
http://xml-utils.com
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 14:50, Tim Edwards
<Edwards.T_at_cambridgeassessment.org.uk> wrote:
> It might be that I was missing the obvious but personally I never realised
> there was a correlation between JAX-RS and Jersey versions.
>
> Seems to me going from 1.1.5 -> 2.0 will require explanation to those who
> know there was such a correlation in the first place and will largely be
> forgotten once the initial confusion has been overcome, whereas 1.1.5 -> 3.0
> will require explanation to everybody else and will always be required to
> explain the absence of a 2.0.
>
> I guess the sensible route would be the one that requires the least
> explanation to the least people.
>
> Tim
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul.Sandoz_at_Sun.COM [mailto:Paul.Sandoz_at_Sun.COM]
> Sent: 08 January 2010 13:32
> To: users_at_jersey.dev.java.net
> Subject: Re: [Jersey] Releasing Jersey 1.1.5 on the week of Jan 18th
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2010, at 2:27 PM, Sudhakar Kumar wrote:
>
> As a developer, I don't see the cause for confusion between the versions of
> Jersey and JAX-RS. Introducing 2.0 or 3.0 when there is no reason to do so
> is a permanent confusion in my opinion.
>
>
> I did give a reason, of course it may not be a *good* enough reason to
> justify such a version change.
>
> Thoughts from the community?
>
>
> Yes please, the current input is most helpful but more would help me better
> decide on what direction to take.
> Paul.
>
> Click here to report this email as spam.
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, employee or agent responsible for
> delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> that any dissemination or copying of this communication and its attachments
> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication and its
> attachments in error, please return the original message and attachments to
> the sender using the reply facility on e-mail. Internet communications are
> not secure and therefore Cambridge Assessment (the brand name for the
> University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate, the constituent
> elements of which are CIE, ESOL and OCR [Oxford Cambridge and RSA
> Examinations is a Company Limited by Guarantee Registered in England.
> Registered office: 1 Hills Road, Cambridge CB1 2EU. Company number:
> 3484466]) does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this
> message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and
> do not necessarily represent those of Cambridge Assessment unless otherwise
> specifically stated. The information contained in this email may be subject
> to public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Unless the
> information is legally exempt from disclosure, the confidentiality of this
> email and your reply cannot be guaranteed.
>
> This message has been scanned for viruses by BlackSpider MailControl