Mailing-List: contact open-jpa-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of ppoddar@bea.com designates
 63.96.176.25 as permitted sender)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: version numbers
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:35:56 -0700
Message-ID: <5C219175D559A64D8C2CC65E41D3685621C249@repbex01.amer.bea.com>
In-Reply-To: <7D856CDFE035FF45A0420ACBD71BDD6301D4C3A0@repbex02.amer.bea.com>
Thread-Topic: version numbers
Thread-Index: Aca4sGeRHkJamB+YRKKLmsKoP5n58gTHyL8QAAeM7DA=
From: "Pinaki Poddar" <ppoddar@bea.com>
To: <open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org>

Neat idea.
+1.=20


Pinaki Poddar
BEA Systems
415.402.7317 =20


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Linskey=20
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 6:01 PM
To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: version numbers

Does anyone have any thoughts about the questions posed below? In
particular, I haven't heard a peep about issues > 1.

Marc Prud'hommeaux proposed an interesting alternate to solution 2b --
we could prefix all the current @since tags with '0.', so that the old
Kodo version information is still accessible (i.e., we'd have @since
0.3.3 for things that were introduced in Kodo 3.3).

Thoughts?

-Patrick

--
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc.=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Linskey
> Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 9:59 AM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: version numbers
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> Some questions about version numbers:
>=20
> 1. Is it true that we should keep the OpenJPA version number below 1.0

> until we get out of incubation?
>=20
>=20
> 2. The @since tags in the OpenJPA javadocs are currently all relative=20
> to Kodo version numbers (i.e., the most recent ones say @since 4.1,=20
> etc.).
> How do we want to rectify this? Options:
>=20
> a) Move OpenJPA's version number up to 4.1 as soon as it comes out of=20
> incubation.
>=20
> b) The Reverse Emacs. Toss a 1 onto the beginning, so that 4.1 becomes

> 1.4.1.
>=20
> c) Ignore the problem. There's nothing to see here.
>=20
> d) Remove all the @since tags, and start afresh.
>=20
>=20
> 3. Should we be striving to keep the version numbers of the various=20
> sub-modules in sync, or should each get a separate version number=20
> moving forward?
>=20
> -Patrick
>=20
> --
> Patrick Linskey
> BEA Systems, Inc.=20
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________
> Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may=20
> contain information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and=20
> affiliated entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,=20
> copyrighted  and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the

> use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not=20
> the intended recipient, and have received this message in error,=20
> please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
>=20
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated
entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.