htrace-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Date Sun, 07 Dec 2014 01:38:14 GMT
What we did for Phoenix is make an initial ASF release that was the granted code with a package
name search-and-replace and minor version increment. This let us focus on all the Apache packaging
and release concerns like NOTICE file wording, RAT compliance, etc. and provided an opportunity
for existing users to migrate to an ASF artifact at low risk - just package renames. Then
we made a major version increment and put in some significant new features for that next release.




> On Dec 5, 2014, at 9:36 PM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think going backwards to 1.0 would be confusing for any existing users.
> Maybe make the -incubating releases pickup 3.1.x with the intention of the
> first graduated release being 4.0.0. Could be seen as artificially
> inflating the version numbers, but I don't think that matters too much. I
> assume (prefer) we'll follow the guidelines of semantic versioning.
> 
> -n
> 
>> On Friday, December 5, 2014, Colin McCabe <cmccabe@alumni.cmu.edu> wrote:
>> 
>> I looked at
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
>> and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1.  Hmm.
>> 
>> I think either way could work.  There is stuff from org.htrace up on
>> Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
>> conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0.  I don't really have any
>> preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
>> 
>> best,
>> Colin
>> 
>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
>> wrote:
>>> org.htrace was at 3.0.4
>>> 
>>> The next release could be 4.0.0.
>>> 
>>> Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
>>> 
>>> Any opinions out there?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> St.Ack
>> 

Mime
View raw message