Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 42760 invoked from network); 9 Oct 2007 18:02:46 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Oct 2007 18:02:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 29642 invoked by uid 500); 9 Oct 2007 18:02:30 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 29604 invoked by uid 500); 9 Oct 2007 18:02:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 29579 invoked by uid 99); 9 Oct 2007 18:02:30 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 11:02:30 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.202.165.35] (HELO smtpauth12.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net) (64.202.165.35) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:02:32 +0000 Received: (qmail 5160 invoked from network); 9 Oct 2007 18:02:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (24.15.193.17) by smtpauth12.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.35) with ESMTP; 09 Oct 2007 18:02:08 -0000 Message-ID: <470BC21F.50909@rowe-clan.net> Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 13:02:07 -0500 From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Justin Erenkrantz CC: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: [discuss] Adopt n.{odd} unstable release versioning? References: <470BBF00.7080303@rowe-clan.net> <5c902b9e0710091053q7713c3e4m55f7916da8969eb0@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5c902b9e0710091053q7713c3e4m55f7916da8969eb0@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > On Oct 9, 2007 10:48 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >> [X] retain versioning as-is, e.g. 1.3.0 is our next potential 'GA release' > > If we have API-incompatible changes, then start the 2.x.x process - > but us distributing 1.x.x with in-flux APIs is insane. -- justin One can argue bopping from 2.x.x to 3.x.x. to 4.x.x is much more asinine, as it would give API users no possibility of settling on a supported version with major releases every 6 to 12 months for API-breaking changes.