lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Otis Gospodnetic <otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: releases
Date Fri, 27 Oct 2006 05:51:10 GMT
----- Original Message ----
From: Chris Hostetter <hossman_lucene@fucit.org>

: But consistency would help me and I suppose I still favor flagging
: everything as 2.1 now. If not for the simple reason that I don't know
: how to decide if something should go into some 2.0.1 when I don't know
: what's going to trigger the need for it.

see ... i would argue that it makes more sense to just leave FV
unspecified unless you have a specific reason why you think the issue you
are resolving should *drive* the creation of a release, or be merged into
a specific release branch.  Only if you are saying "this is an urgent bug
fix" should you flag something as 2.0.1 indicating that you think we need
a 2.0.1 release.

OG: I agree.  I think historically we've had only a few point (X.Y.Z) releases due to serious
bugs.  Check page 9 in Lucene in Action for release history up to 1.4.3.  It looks like 1.4.1
was the only bug-caused point release.  In general, I think patches have been going to trunk,
and we'd just pick a day to make a release when enough new stuff/fixes accumulated.  If what
I'm saying is right, then I think what Hoss is saying makes sense - leave FV unspecified,
unless the patch is for a serious bug that needs to be applied to the released version and
another release be made.

Otis




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message