Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-felix-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 92054 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2009 14:21:12 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Sep 2009 14:21:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 3872 invoked by uid 500); 1 Sep 2009 14:21:11 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-felix-dev-archive@felix.apache.org Received: (qmail 3768 invoked by uid 500); 1 Sep 2009 14:21:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@felix.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@felix.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@felix.apache.org Received: (qmail 3747 invoked by uid 99); 1 Sep 2009 14:21:11 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 14:21:11 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of heavy@ungoverned.org designates 69.89.21.16 as permitted sender) Received: from [69.89.21.16] (HELO outbound-mail-21.bluehost.com) (69.89.21.16) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 14:21:01 +0000 Received: (qmail 24834 invoked by uid 0); 1 Sep 2009 14:20:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO host118.hostmonster.com) (74.220.207.118) by outboundproxy2.bluehost.com with SMTP; 1 Sep 2009 14:20:40 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=ungoverned.org; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=JMh43HpHDBgdlFynf3CXYJ78NxUkWzeHi5Eg10+VVDnyI1gOqJ2gWH/2s/L/BqIU4gLAUccwItVBMjtf7k5vj+ASCXrdOUkZlyY1fUIGnB07HG8QmH8Nkg9BvYK8ApjF; Received: from clt-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([192.18.128.5] helo=heavyweight.local) by host118.hostmonster.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MiUDw-0002iv-Lz for dev@felix.apache.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:20:40 -0600 Message-ID: <4A9D2DB7.5070307@ungoverned.org> Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 10:20:39 -0400 From: "Richard S. Hall" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090715 Thunderbird/3.0b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@felix.apache.org Subject: Re: Releasing Gogo ? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {1027:host118.hostmonster.com:ungovern:ungoverned.org} {sentby:smtp auth 192.18.128.5 authed with heavy@ungoverned.org} X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Agreed. -> richard On 9/1/09 2:25, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > I'd like to release a first version of Gogo. > However, given the RFC is bound to change and that we might introduce > other changes that will break the syntax, I wonder if we should use a > 0.2.0 version instead of 1.0.0. > In addition, we will release the org.osgi.service.command package > which is not official, so I think keeping a version< 1.0.0 makes > sense until a spec is released for that. > Thoughts ? > >