Re: Moving XMLC to ObjectWeb's SF

I have no problem with the move.  Sounds like a good idea. 
However, I'm wondering if we shouldn't make a release of XMLC in its
current state before doing the package renaming?  That is, unless it
really isn't a big deal to do.  I'm just worried that there might be
some bugs to flush out if the changes are significant.  The new
reloading is compelling enough to want it sooner than later.  The
current state could be released as XMLC-2.2 and the next package-renamed
release could be XMLC-3.0 which would distinguish it from the 2.x
releases.  An XMLC refactored to use DOM4J might be released as
XMLC-4.0 to distinguish it from the Xerces releases.  Sound
logical?

BTW, does the package renaming include gnu-regexp and jtidy?  I'd
think that would be unnecessary.  Xerces is the source of all the
problems.  The other libraries can be left alone until such time as
they are deemed to be problematic as well.

Jake

At 01:17 PM 1/27/2003 +0100, you wrote:
> On Sunday 26 January 2003 08:46,
> David Li wrote:
> > I have registered a Enhydra XMLC project on ObjectWeb's SF
> >
> (http://debian-sf.objectweb.org/)
> and plan to move XMLC over. Since
> > this is going to begin a new CVS tree, should we perform the
> refatoring
> > of the Xerces namespace before moving?
>
> +1 from me. If the CVS tree is moved anyway, we can do the package rename
> at 
> the same time, without losing the version history.
>
> -- 
> Richard Kunze 
>
> [ t]ivano Software, Bahnhofstr. 18, 63263 Neu-Isenburg
> Tel.: +49 6102 80 99 07 - 0, Fax.: +49 6102 80 99 07 - 1
> http://www.tivano.de,
> kunze@xxxxxxxxx 
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> XMLC mailing list
> XMLC@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.enhydra.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/xmlc