htrace-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Colin McCabe <cmcc...@alumni.cmu.edu>
Subject Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Date Sat, 06 Dec 2014 09:01:02 GMT
Makes sense to me.  +1 for 3.1.0-SNAPSHOT

best,
Colin

On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 11:56 PM, Elliott Clark <eclark@apache.org> wrote:
> Most projects I have seen that changed their maven artifact org have
> continued from the old one (netty et al).
> +1 for using 3.1 for our first releases.
>
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 9:46 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Folks,
>> +0 on keeping versioning going >3.1.X or 3.2
>> I'll get more involved as the weeks go on.
>> Have a great weekend folks
>> Lewis
>>
>> On Fri, 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
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Lewis*
>>

Mime
View raw message