incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Estes <tim.es...@digitalreasoning.com>
Subject Re: Time for 1.0
Date Thu, 13 Jan 2011 14:14:06 GMT
Speaking more for an organization that works with a lot of external parties using Cassandra
(that don't necessarily develop on it), I think the pivot to 1.0 makes better sense. A lot
of the world is still coming to know Cassandra vs. any other NoSQL type solution. In that
environment, I think the production grade validation is important.

to the point below... I'd submit that sometimes you jump for 8.0 to 10.0. Then we just move
the decimal.

Really- I'm sure that groups can make the shift and get it. 

+1 to Jonathan's original suggestion.

-- 
Tim Estes
CEO 
Digital Reasoning Systems



On Jan 13, 2011, at 1:58 AM, Daniel Lundin wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Eric Evans <eevans@rackspace.com> wrote:
>> I'd rather drop the leading the 0 and continue to number releases
>> sequentially the way we have.  If our < 1 versioning is signaling a lack
>> of readiness, and if >= 1 is a necessary gate, then 8.0 should work
>> equally as well.  Better in fact, 8 times better!
> 
> +1 for semantic versioning <http://semver.org/>.
> 
> It may not be perfect (whatever that means) but at least it has a
> common, [well] defined meaning.
> 
> As for `due diligence`, that's a fine codename for the next release. :)


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message