Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-18911-apmail-geronimo-dev-archive=geronimo.apache.org@geronimo.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 3261 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2005 18:26:26 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 31 Oct 2005 18:26:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 26019 invoked by uid 500); 31 Oct 2005 18:26:22 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org
Received: (qmail 25974 invoked by uid 500); 31 Oct 2005 18:26:21 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:dev-help@geronimo.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@geronimo.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@geronimo.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
List-Id: <dev.geronimo.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received: (qmail 25962 invoked by uid 99); 31 Oct 2005 18:26:21 -0000
Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:26:21 -0800
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0
	tests=
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Received: from [199.237.51.194] (HELO green.rootmode.com) (199.237.51.194)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:26:17 -0800
X-ClientAddr: 68.171.62.46
Received: from [192.168.15.100] (68-171-62-46.vnnyca.adelphia.net
 [68.171.62.46])
	by green.rootmode.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j9VIPpUh010358
	for <dev@geronimo.apache.org>; Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:25:51 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v734)
In-Reply-To: <9e3862d80510302129j4d199cbel2c258b19f876ba37@mail.gmail.com>
References: <F53C0D5A-C1FF-4B5F-8933-9B68AB7CA27A@iq80.com>
 <9e3862d80510302129j4d199cbel2c258b19f876ba37@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <7E26E808-DD6A-495E-99D8-5A508D45BE55@iq80.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Dain Sundstrom <dain@iq80.com>
Subject: Re: Specs directory structure
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:25:54 -0800
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.734)
X-RootMode-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more
 information
X-RootMode-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: dain@iq80.com
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org
X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

Just to clarify you mean we should have this:

   <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.specs</groupId>
   <artifactId>servlet-2.4</artifactId>
   <name>Geronimo :: Servlet API</name>
   <version>1</version>

So the version number is a single non-dotted increasing integer?

BTW for most APIs we will be able to simply release a certified  
version and never update, but for some APIs, like JavaMail, are  
mostly implementation code, we will have to to patch releases.  Also  
if we get into the habit of adding JavaDoc documentation over time,  
we will have to do periodic release to get the line numbers in the  
debug symbols to match-up.

-dain

On Oct 30, 2005, at 9:29 PM, Brett Porter wrote:

> I think this versioning has potential to be confusing, and the
> omission of <version/> below doesn't actually do that - though it is
> probably possible with a version of (,) that includes everything.
>
> Personally, I'd prefer to have:
> servlet-api-2.4
> servlet-api-2.4-1
> servlet-api-2.4-2
> or similar.
>
> (Technically, the last "build number" is used for rebuilding the same
> source code, not patching, but I think the alternative of 2.4.x
> creates some more confusion and the above will work as intended).
> Ideally, once 2.4 is compliant you don't need to release it again
> anyway :)
>
> Perhaps when we have proper spec-dependency handling in Maven it might
> be less confusing to use the geronimo-spec version number instead of
> the spec number.
>
> My 2cents...
>
> - Brett
>
>
> On 10/30/05, Dain Sundstrom <dain@iq80.com> wrote:
>
>> I know this has been talked about before on this list, but I'd like
>> to get the proposal in one place.  With the help of Alan and Jason,
>> this is what I got:
>>
>> Normally we just have this directory structure:
>>
>> specs/trunk/servlet-2.2/src/
>> specs/trunk/servlet-2.4/src/
>> specs/trunk/jsp-2.4/src/
>> When we are happy with the specs we make a tag:
>>
>> specs/tags/1.0/servlet-2.2/src/
>> specs/tags/1.0/servlet-2.4/src/
>> specs/tags/1.0/javamail-2.2-r2/src/
>> specs/tags/1.1/servlet-2.2/src/
>> specs/tags/1.1/servlet-2.4/src/
>> specs/tags/1.1/javamail-2.2-r2/src/
>> The pom for the specs would be like this:
>>
>>    <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.specs</groupId>
>>      <artifactId>servlet-2.4</artifactId>
>>      <name>Geronimo :: Servlet API</name>
>>    <version>1.0</version>
>> With maven 2 version ranges a user can just have the following and
>> maven will pick the most resent release of our spec automatically:
>>
>>    <dependency>
>>      <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.specs</groupId>
>>      <artifactId>servlet-2.4</artifactId>
>>    <dependency>
>>
>> The current directory structure in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/
>> geronimo/specs is very close to this.  The only big change will be to
>> add the version number of the specification to the directory name.
>>
>> What do yo think?
>>
>> -dain
>>
>