geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Paul McMahan" <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] specs versioning
Date Mon, 11 Dec 2006 18:52:20 GMT
I'm in favor of a single version for all specs.  Versioning the specs
individually has some advantages but makes the release manager's job
more difficult since the tooling doesn't readily support that
approach.  And as a developer (at least for me) a single version is
more intuitive, evidenced by my recent snafu where I created the
initial version of jsp 2.1 spec at 1.1-SNAPSHOT.  Thankfully Jason
keeps a very close eye on things and suggested using 1.0-SNAPSHOT

I also believe having the specs all at a single release is consistent
with the approach we use in server/trunk, where the artifacts share
the same geronimo version and when necessary a version number can be
included in the artifactId.   Consistency has its benefits.

Best wishes,

On 12/11/06, Kevan Miller <> wrote:
> The versioning policy for our geronimo specs has been floating around
> for a while now. I'd like to see this issue resolved.
> There have been two approaches discussed
> 1) Single version -- all specs are released under the same version
> number.
> 2) Separate version -- each spec is versioned separately from the
> other specs.
> Dain created a review of the two proposals in the wiki -- http://
> I think
> you can quibble over a few of the details, but it does a good job at
> summarizing the issue.
> IMO, there are going to be drawbacks no matter which approach we
> take. However, I'm going to be happy with either approach as long as
> we reach a *decision*. I'd prefer that we reach consensus on this
> discussion thread. However, if necessary, we can vote on the issue.
> Personally, I think we should use a single version for releasing our
> specs. I think this makes it easier for us as developers in managing
> spec releases. I think users will find it easier to collect a
> consistent set of specifications. I think these benefits outweigh
> concerns over the lack of flexibility and the wasteful aspects of re-
> releasing unchanged specifications.
> I suppose there's a hybrid option where we release separate versions,
> now, and move to a single version policy (2.0?) for our next release.
> --kevan

View raw message