commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
Subject Re: [ALL] Version number(s) for modular components
Date Mon, 28 Nov 2016 00:12:30 GMT
>> [...]
>
> <IMO>
> Let's keep in mind the context here: This is a component in Apache 
> Commons,
> not a TLP. Therefore, IMO, we should match user's expectations of
> simplicity, which is one repo and version for the component, 
> multi-module
> or not, just like all of the other Apache Commons components, where 
> all
> Commons multi-module components are released as one version.
> </IMO>

So, the issue is not to try and decide whether an idea is good or bad,
but to follow a rule that is deemed "simple".[1]

The problem is that this rule is not one, since I gave a 
counter-example
with "Commons Math".

If such "Commons" policies (good or bad) would be documented and
_enforced_,[2] much less discussion would ensue.
And more people might become aware of the contradictions brought along
with the set of rules they qualify as "simple" when a project does not
fit their a priori conceptions.


Gilles

[1] And nothing that has been said is a convincing argument that a
     single version number, for a bunch of weakly related codes, better
     qualify as "simple" rather than "misleading".
[2] Branch "MATH_3_X" of "Commons Math" would either have been vetoed
     or the rule which you advocate here (one version per repo) would
     have been repealed, years ago.
     It is such contradictions that make it very difficult to go forward
     in "Commons".

>
> Gary
>
>


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


Mime
View raw message