geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: 1.0 release Candidate 2...some guidelines
Date Thu, 15 Dec 2005 17:12:38 GMT
Good idea Paul...I like the date time string idea.

Paul McMahan wrote:
> On 12/15/05, Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> 
>>
>>Second, someone pointed out (I think it was Jacek) that we did not include
>>a
>>notation in the binary about what the release candidate was so that it is
>>not
>>confused with the final release.  Before releasing another cut I would
>>like the
>>naming convention of the binary and the directories to be clearer as to
>>what
>>they contain otherwise this will get confusing.  My suggestion is that the
>>name be:
>>
>>geronimo-jetty-1.0-rc[n].tar.gz for example.  Where [n] is the number of
>>the
>>release candidate (and we are now on number 2).  The next set of images
>>should
>>follow this convention to ensure we are not confusing the users.  I know
>>these
>>are release candidates and this isn't required but it would make me sleep
>>better
>>at night :)  The directory that is actually contained in the zip will
>>still be
>>geronimo-1.0.  Thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> Matt,  including a notation in the filename seems like a good idea and could
> help prevent confusion.  I've also seen projects use a date string instead
> of a release candidate number for this purpose.  Using a date string is
> helpful since it makes it obvious when the image was created plus avoids
> publicizing how many unsuccessful attempts there have been (not saying that
> would be an issue in this case :o)
> 
> Best wishes,
> Paul
> 


Mime
View raw message