geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: Who cares? [was: [DISCUSS] specs versioning]
Date Tue, 12 Dec 2006 03:36:50 GMT
Ok, I still don't have the brain power but this is in the back of my  
mind.

Here is my take (yes, I'm rehashing stuff).

Currently what we have we don't want so we can eliminate the option  
where we release everything under an uber version number that has no  
bearing on the actual artifacts being released.  So, for instance,  
when we released a modified version of JAAC its version number was  
1.1.1 and all the other modules in the branches/1.1 were at 1.0,  
1.0.1 and 1.1 which is horribly confusing.

We're left with other alternatives of which two seem to be the  
current topic of discussion.

Option 1:
Version all modules independently with no association to each other  
except through perhaps dependencies.
- Makes releasing hard as coordinating multiple modules is the  
responsibility of the consumer
- Makes releasing easy as there is almost no interdependence so work  
on different modules can proceed at their own pace.

Option 2:
Version all modules together under a single version number.  This  
means if we changed JAAC in the above example all other modules would  
also be released as -1.1.1 even though they didn't changed.
- This makes releasing easy as all modules get pushed out a once.
- This makes releasing hard as one module that is having trouble or  
people don't have time to work on it holds up the whole train.

The factor that I think impacts the above options the most is the  
amount of churn in the specs.  A lot of churn makes interdependence a  
PITA and makes option 1 favorable and a little churn makes option 2  
more favorable.

Since specs are versioned / maintained infrequently, we hate the  
existing system and we need to get past the debate and get something  
done *I suggest that we adopt option 2*, give it a go, and if it  
sucks wind then we move to version 3.0 and switch to option 1.

Either way people will be unhappy but getting past this roadblock is  
important.

Is anyone -1 on this approach?

On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:25 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:59 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure that we will ever agree with each other.  I'm not  
>> even trying to convince you or anyone else... cause at this point  
>> I simply don't care.
>
> Before we continue this discussion, how about we first determine if  
> anyone cares?
>
> If you care about how the specs use one version for all specs or  
> one version for each spec, please respond to this email.
>
> -dain
>

Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org



Mime
View raw message