directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ersin Er" <ersin...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Vote] Versionning scheme
Date Fri, 25 May 2007 22:29:56 GMT
[X] +1 : This numbering scheme fits me.

On 5/26/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> we have had many mails exchanged, many convo at ApacheCon EU this month,
> about which is the best versionning scheme for ADS. Strange enough,
> after a first burst of idea, things just cool down a little bit.
>
> We now have to make a decision, though this vote.
>
> Lately, there was some kind of agreement about this scheme :
>
> - X.0 versions will be stable versions (like 1.0.2)
>
> - X.5 versions will be transitonal versions, which means some more
> featurzes can be included (like 1.5.1)
>
> - (X+1).0 version will be the next stable version (like 2.0.1)
>
> - When (X+1) version is issued, then the X version will be terminated
> (no more evolution, only important bug fixes)
>
> - X.0 and X.5 version might be tested against VSLDAP compliance, if needed
>
> - Data migration between X.0 and (X+1).0 should be automated, when data
> migration between X.0 and X.5 might not be done with a tool.
>
> - But when migrating for X.5 to (X+1).0, then a tool *must* be included
> to guarantee data migration.
>
> Ok, the vote now:
>
> [ ] +1 : This numbering scheme fits me
> [ ] +/- 0 : I have no idea, or I don't share this idea, but better this
> one than no scheme
> [ ] -1 : Not a good idea.
>
> Please, feel free to comment your choice, because we will have to give
> an explaination to our users !
>
> Thanks a lot !
> Emmanuel
>


-- 
Ersin

Mime
View raw message