felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Re-trying releases
Date Tue, 08 Feb 2011 18:11:08 GMT
On 2/8/11 13:04, Richard S. Hall wrote:
> On 2/8/11 12:29, Peter Kriens wrote:
>> New version number for any reason makes a lot of sense. A bsn + 
>> version must be as unique as a SHA-1 hashcode of the bundle.
> I think everyone agrees that a new version number should always be 
> used for every release. The issue here is about a release that was 
> never released because it was canceled for some reason during the 
> voting period.

After re-reading your message, I read "reason" as "release"...

However, the tricky part is as I described...at Apache there is no 
release without a proper vote, so the question is, do we need the 
version number to reflect these failed attempts?

Give the ongoing vote on this, it doesn't look like we have any clear 
consensus. As a result, I'm happy to let the person doing the release 

-> richard

> -> richard
>> Kind regards,
>>     Peter Kriens
>> On 4 feb 2011, at 09:39, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>> Guillaume Nodet  wrote
>>>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 02:52, Richard S. 
>>>> Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org>  wrote:
>>>>> If enough people respond maybe we can reach some sort of 
>>>>> consensus...or else
>>>>> we could call a vote on it.
>>>> Can other felix members speak here ?
>>> I guess we don't find consensus by just discussing :) Some of us prefer
>>> it this way, others the other way. I prefer increasing the version
>>> number for each retry, it requires no additional work (except changing
>>> the version in jira) and makes it easier to track if people are using
>>> failed releases. Sure, comparing the hash of the binary artifact would
>>> solve this as well, but just looking at the version number is soo 
>>> easy :)
>>> If - as a project - we agree to use the same version number for retries
>>> I'm ok with as well.
>>> But I agree we should do this consistently and just write it down
>>> somewhere. So let's call a vote and the majority wins :)
>>> Carsten
>>> -- 
>>> Carsten Ziegeler
>>> cziegeler@apache.org

View raw message