Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 99620 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2003 23:23:36 -0000 Received: from mail13.speakeasy.net (HELO mail.speakeasy.net) (216.254.0.213) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 22 Aug 2003 23:23:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 5430 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2003 22:23:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO apache.org) (leland@[66.92.162.13]) (envelope-sender ) by mail13.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 22 Aug 2003 22:23:30 -0000 Message-ID: <3F4697CB.5020100@apache.org> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 18:23:07 -0400 From: Robert Leland User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030820 Mozilla Thunderbird/0.2a X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: Release Process for Sandbox Projects References: <024901c368ac$c0d36950$0801a8c0@lagrange> In-Reply-To: <024901c368ac$c0d36950$0801a8c0@lagrange> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Leo Sutic wrote: > > >>From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:scolebourne@btopenworld.com] >> >>As a warning, my concerns would be the speed of passage >>through the sandbox. You need to think if you have a >>community to maintain this in commons proper, and whether >>people have had enough time to review it. >> >> > >My understanding was that I needed to go to commons proper >before even sending out an alpha release. This put me in > > If you use the Major.Minor.Maintenance numbering scheme you can avoid -initially- calling your software alpha/beta etc ... It would be 0.4.0 developer release, limited release, general release, ie Alpha, Beta, Gamma/Production quality. It avoids the stigma that comes with the label Alpha. Also I believe it also avoids the version inflation that happens, version 1.0 - 3.0 in 6 months or less. -Rob