htrace-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Date Mon, 08 Dec 2014 18:08:29 GMT
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 11:48 PM, Colin McCabe <cmccabe@alumni.cmu.edu>
wrote:

> In general, though, I think that a 3.1.0 release would provide
> the same level of functionality as the 3.0.4, and maybe the next
> release is 4.0.0?
>

No need to hasten to 4.0. Let's see what features/improvements/changes we
want to get out and we can label releases accordingly.

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> 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.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > I think we should do this.
> >
> > Lets stamp it 3.1.0-SNAPSHOT and do a release *tout de suite* that is
> > effectually the same as our 3.0.4 only it has new apache packaging and
> then
> > move forward from there.
> >
> > Letting above hang another few days in case more opinions otherwise will
> > move on the above
> > Thanks,
> > St.Ack
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> > 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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message