commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject [DISCUSS][VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0
Date Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:20:11 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oliver Heger [mailto:oliver.heger@oliver-heger.de]
> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 06:37
> To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0
> 
> 
> 
> Am 17.09.2016 um 18:13 schrieb Gary Gregory:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Gilles: I can see you are frustrated by the late comments and opinions
> when
> > the code has been sitting in the repo for all to see. I hope we can
> resolve
> > all of this amicably.
> >
> > All: We have only one shot at 1.0, this will set the tone for a 1.x
> line.
> > If things change/mature/break enough then it becomes 2.0, but if it
> happens
> > too soon, then it might give the impression that our process is not
> mature.
> >
> > It seems we have a difference of opinion as to whether the current
> code is
> > ready for 1.0.
> >
> > Now that we have both sides engaged in this discussion, we can try to
> > resolve these differences in email agreements or in code changes.
> Maybe the
> > -1 party could create Jiras to address specific issues, or should all
> this
> > happen on the ML?
> 
> Currently only Gilles responded to the proposals of Emmanuel. I would
> also be interested in the PoV of the other developers.
> 
> Oliver
> 

[orcmid] 

Rather than have this run around in circles and frustrate the great work Gilles has provided
in advancing Commons RNG, would it work to call it 0.9 and get it out the door?

I say 0.9 because under norms for version numbers, the 0.*.* are assumed to be vulnerable
to breaking changes in interfaces - signatures and behaviors.  And since there is apparently
some objection to the API and the prospect of breaking changes it would be nice to (1) get
this work in folks' hands and (2) get to work on whatever needs to be done about the API.

I am making no assumptions about the quality of the API.  0.9 is insurance until that argument
and use by others can be settled.  Then the API discussion can happen in some constructive
place far better than the [VOTE] thread.

 - Dennis


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message