harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "robert burrell donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] proposal : starting a release train
Date Thu, 08 Mar 2007 22:23:41 GMT
On 3/8/07, Alex Blewitt <alex.blewitt@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/03/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 8, 2007, at 2:27 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote:
> >
> > > We ought to have a version monkier as well as M1, to ensure we don't
> > > get confused in the future. Apache Harmony 1.0M1 would make sense, or
> > > if we want to sync with the proposed Java versioning numbers then
> > > Apache Harmony 5.0M1 might make sense.
> >
> > Please not 1.0M1.  Please please please.
>
> Why?

another reason: once you start publishing 1.0XXX releases, the world
outside tends (wrongly) to think that harmony is at 1.0

> And what would you call the first milestone release targeted at e.g.
> Java 6 after the Harmony Java 5 is out of the door?

that is quite a different question

ATM harmony is still a work in progress without a mature, stable
release. it's important to manage expectations and releases are part
of that. numbering releases potentially opens up a whole world of pain
as well as reducing the impact of the final release.

for example, users will want to know exactly what the number means.
this is a tough question to answer: yes, people are proud about the
progress made but don't want to waste too much time on questions from
inexperienced users and don't want to raise expectations too high
until harmony is right. there really isn't a good answer. not
numbering elegantly sidesteps this problem. ISTM that this milestone
train is aimed at people with knowledge and sympathy for harmony. it
will downstream packages to test and prepare for the final full
release. it will allow experienced users to test a fixed version of
harmony on their machines.

- robert

Mime
View raw message