On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 10:59:10 -0600, Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> I'd like to ship a 3.1 M6 (or some stable incremental build
between then
> and FC4 freeze) with FC4 and then update to M7 and 3.1 final as they come
> out.
Me too. Because of ...
> - awesome new plug-ins like Jeff Pound's ongoing work on the Bugzilla
> plug-in are dependent upon 3.1 (without a tonne of back-porting)
Thing like that, which would make the development life-cycle process in
eclipse more complete .. and ..
> - making RPMs will be much simpler than how we're doing the 3.0.1 now
Organization of above.
> I'd like to go with 3.1, but we'll need to do lots of testing and
> bug-fixing. The number of gcj/libgcj hackers capable of fixing bugs isn't
> that high and even getting things down to test cases is not an easy task.
> I'd like to hear people's opinions.
I'll help where I can. In porting the plug-ins (CDT, ChangeLog, RPM
import/export, etc) I expect some cross experience to apply.
Love to help with testing. I use Eclipse 3.1M4 daily.
Regards
Phil
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
--
Nick Bargnesi
http://www.den-4.com
Den 4 Software
pub 1024D/E8BD2FD0 2004-12-02 Nick Bargnesi <nbargnesi(a)gmail.com>
Key fingerprint = 6F9D 9404 63CD 2B04 DE7A 0F9D A1ED C1B0 E8BD 2FD0
sub 2048g/56C5D45B 2004-12-02
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda