lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shai Erera <ser...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Take 2: Open up a separate line for unstable Solr/Lucene development
Date Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:55:04 GMT
An interesting point was made on Version - we cannot remove it from
trunk just to reintroduce it when trunk is released as .0 and then
followed by .1 .2 "stable" releases … otherwise it would
appear/disappear constantly :)?

So I guess Versuon should go away entirely?

Shai

On Monday, April 26, 2010, Michael McCandless <lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> This is exactly the intention behind the proposal we are voting on.
>
> Big changes, that'd be destabilizing if attempted on the stable
> branch, would be done only on unstable (= trunk).
>
> More "normal" changes, which can still include deprecations/some back
> compat, would be done on the stable branch and unstable.
>
> So, eg, rather than attempt back compat for a big change like flex, we
> would instead do it only in unstable and it'd first become "available"
> in the next .0 release.
>
> By segregating the big changes away from stable we should be able to
> keep stronger back compat on stable.  We also save our resources not
> building costly back compat layers that, because of their complexity,
> bring their own problems.  Also, our release numbers are more
> "standard" -- the .0 release will have major changes (unlike today
> where is has no changes except removal of deprecations).
>
> Mike
>
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 4/26/10 2:43 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>>>
>>> My best guess: that what this is really suggesting is that "trunk"
>>> *always*  be targeted at the next "major" release (ie: 4.0, 5.0, 6.0,
>>> etc...) and that development of minor releases (ie: 3.2, 3.3, ...; 4.1.,
>>> 4.2, etc...) happen on "more stable" branches off of the major version
>>> release branches (ie: branch_3_0 forks off trunk when 3.0 is release,
>>> branch_3_1 forks off branch_3_0 when 3.1 releases, etc...)
>>
>> This is what I would like. Not sure if that's what will come from the
>> current proposal or not, but seems so to me.
>>
>> --
>> - Mark
>>
>> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

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


Mime
View raw message