Re: What do we need for a 2.1 final release?

Hi Shash,
 
Thanks a lot for the answers, some things below: 

>"Sasvata (Shash) Chatterjee" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>If you can use HEAD, go for it (for development), it is stable. For 
>production, if your process calls for a stable, released framework, then 
>wait for 2.1-final, or we can make another 2.1-dev snapshot release.

I will try to help on the improvement of the documentation whenever I can.
 
is it possible to make another release with the new changes (including the api change of a few days back) something like 2.1-rc1 or so?  If not, we'll go with HEAD.

>There is a JDO implementation using TJDO, but I have never used it.
 
What I mean is if Keel supports out of the box the use of JDO for persistence ?

>There is workflow support using a custom workflow engine, which is like 
>WW action chains on steroids (app-workflow). But it is not a true 
>persistent workflow used for BPM. This would be a welcome add for 
>Keel. I would be willing to help on this if you or someone wants to get 
>started on it. I'd think a good starting point would be to study the 
>capabilities of a couple of these tools and distilling a common service 
>interface for the workflow service. Wan'na take a shot :-) ?

We'll take a look at app-workflow.
 
And Yes, we are planing to use either bonita or jbpm, there is no final decision.  I would very much welcome your help on this.  We'll keep posting questions on this mail list as we go along.
 
Thanks a lot for your fast responses!!  Carlos