Hi Marek,
On the one hand you expect the community to contribute "any new features
or minor improvements & annoyance fixes in 1.x code base". On the other
hand when I tried to do precisely that
(
https://github.com/jersey/jersey-1.x/pull/5) I waited 3 weeks for a
reply, and then you closed the pull request without merging the changes
or leaving a comment.
How is the community supposed to work under these conditions?
Gili
On 17/03/2014 10:25 AM, Marek Potociar wrote:
> Hi Gili,
>
> As the closing comment suggests ("Minor issue, will not fix in the
> sustained code."), this is a minor issue in our view. As such we are
> not going to fix it in Jersey 1.x as this code has been moved to
> sustaining mode and we do not have cycles to fix such minor issues in
> a sustained code base. We will still be delivering fixes for critical
> bugs discovered in 1.x code base. However any new features or minor
> improvements & annoyance fixes in 1.x code base are left for community
> contribution.
>
> Feel free to open feature requests against Jersey 2.x for any features
> you are missing there.
>
> Cheers,
> Marek
>
> On 06 Mar 2014, at 05:42, cowwoc <cowwoc_at_bbs.darktech.org
> <mailto:cowwoc_at_bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>
>> https://java.net/jira/browse/JERSEY-1952
>>
>> It was my understanding that you wouldn't close legitimate Jersey 1.x
>> bugs just because Jersey 2.x exists? Jersey 2.x is actually worse in
>> this regard (unit tests are even less flexible than in 1.x).
>>
>> Please reopen this issue until Jersey 2.x gains feature parity with
>> 1.x and majority community support. Most of us still need Jersey 1.x
>> support.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Gili
>