Folks,
looking at the road map, I see
jBPM jPDL 3.2.4 (01-Sep-2008)
jPDL 4.0 alpha1 (01-Aug-2008)
jPDL 4.0 alpha2 (11-Sep-2008)
First, I think we should have a consistent naming scheme (i.e. either we use the jBPM
prefix or not)
Second, it is important that the releases go lock-step with respect to the API. Only if
the functionality offered through the API actually has an implementation in both code
bases we can be sure that it is the API that we want.
Therefore I propose for jPDL4 a release cycle that aligns with jBPM3. Faster than eight
weeks is very hard to manage anyway given the documentation and test coverage that is
required.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4161167#...
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...