buildr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexis Midon <alexismi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: No beta or RC?
Date Fri, 20 Feb 2009 05:24:33 GMT
Let's base the discussion on a real use case, so we can be specific:
I'm currently developing a new feature for ODE. This development is done in
a separate branch named FOO based on version 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT. When I'll think
my development is good enough for testing, I'd like to release and share
this version of my branch.
But if we look at the buildfiles, both branches, 1.X and FOO, are about to
release with the same version: 1.3.0. This is really confusing and does not
denote the code differences

so how should we handle this case?

A few of points:
Personnally I think the SNAPSHOT suffix is completely useless. To me, a
snapshot is not different from a release and is just additional complexity.
A 3-digit version is enough.

Qualifiers should be supported obviously. But they do not solve our case:
parallel developments. the conventiont is that 1.3.0 is newer than
1.3.0-FOO. And this describes a sequence anyway.

Assaf has suggested that the package name should discriminate parallel
developments. The branch FOO should release artifacts named like
ode-compiler-FOO-1.3.0, while 1.x (the main branch) releases
ode-compiler-1.3.0. The difference is clearly stated and do not interfer
with version comparaison.


On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Alex Boisvert <boisvert@intalio.com> wrote:

> Oh, right, you mean the "qualifier".
>
> Here's what Better Builds with
> Maven<http://repo.exist.com/dist/maestro/1.7.0/BetterBuildsWithMaven.pdf
> >says,
>
> With regard to ordering, the elements are considered in sequence to
> determine which is newer - first by major version, second - if the major
> versions were equal - by minor version, third by bug fix version, fourth by
> qualifier (using string comparison), and finally, by build number. A
> version
> that contains a qualifier is older than a version without a qualifier; for
> example, 1.2-beta is older than version 1.2. A version that also contains a
> build number is considered newer than a version without a build number;
> for example, 1.2-beta-1 is newer than 1.2-beta.
>
> But my point still stands, Buildr should drop the SNAPSHOT qualifier (and
> only SNAPSHOT) during a release.
>
> alex
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Feb 9, 2009, at 4:16 PM, Alex Boisvert <boisvert@intalio.com> wrote:
> >
> >  Ugh?   If beta is not a release but a pre-release, how do you
> pre-release
> >> a
> >> beta?
> >>
> >
> > Then maybe it's called something else, either way the fourth part is
> > constrained.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 10:43 PM, Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>  On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Alex Boisvert <boisvert@intalio.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  The Maven conventions don't restrict the version to only numbers, so
> >>>>
> >>> yeah,
> >>>
> >>>> buildr should only strip a "-SNAPSHOT" suffix.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Actually it does: releases must end with numbers, pre-releases (rc,
> beta,
> >>> etc) with alphanumerics, and therefore 0 by virtue of being a release
> is
> >>> higher than beta2.  OSGi uses alphanumerics on the fourth part, other
> >>> package managers have their own conventions.  Buildr doesn't follow
> >>> anything
> >>> more complicated than numerical.
> >>>
> >>> Assaf
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> alex
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Matthieu Riou <matthieu@offthelip.org
> >>>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>  Hi guys,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The logic in release strips out any letter that comes after the
last
> >>>>>
> >>>> ('.'
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>>
> >>>>> digit) in a project release number. So something like 1.2-beta will
> >>>>> actually
> >>>>> be released as 1.2. Sounds to me like a bug but I just wanted to
> check
> >>>>> before that it wasn't by design, an adoption of the 'no letter in
> >>>>>
> >>>> releases'
> >>>>
> >>>>> RubyGem doctrine.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Given that the actual goal is only to strip an ending "-SNAPSHOT",
> the
> >>>>>
> >>>> fix
> >>>>
> >>>>> is pretty straightforward.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>> Matthieu
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message