openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Phill Moran" <pjmo...@rogers.com>
Subject RE: [VOTE] move current release to 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT
Date Thu, 24 May 2007 03:25:39 GMT
Why don't we follow (I believe the SUN standard)  convention of using the three
digits as in 1.2.3. 
A change from 1.2.3 to 1.2.4 is a bug fix release no new functionality and fully
backward compatible. 
A change from 1.2.3 to 1.3 can have new functionality and bug fixes but is fully
backwards compatible. 
Finally a change from 1.2.3 to 2.0 is new functionality, bug fixes and no
guarantee of backward compatibility

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Linskey [mailto:plinskey@gmail.com] 
Sent: May 23, 2007 8:41 PM
To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] move current release to 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT

How do 1.0 and 1.0.0 differ? The way I've done things in the past, the first
major release is called 1.0.0, the first patch release 1.0.1, etc. Then, when I
say "1.0", what I really mean is "the latest code in the 1.0 branch, whatever
that is right now".

When we did Kodo releases in the past, we tried hard to not do new feature
development in a maintenance branch. So, following that methodology, once we
released 1.0.0, we would make a 1.0 branch, which would periodically have tags
on it when we release 1.0.1 etc. As soon as 1.0 was out, all the interesting new
cool stuff would then go into the mainline, which would be 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT.
(Unless, of course, we had already cut a branch for 1.1 also, in which case the
mainline would be 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT, etc.)

-Patrick

On 5/23/07, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com> wrote:
> -1
>
> I like the idea of having our first release out of the incubator be 1.0.
>
> Let's drop the trailing .0 and reserve the third digit for patch 
> releases. This brings up the issue of release naming which we've 
> deferred until now. I think we need to decide what we call releases 
> and at what level we support backward compatibility.
>
> I'll just emphasize my earlier comments about going through the open 
> JIRA issues and really making sure that we'll address the major 
> functionality, performance, and usability deficiencies. So this will 
> affect the schedule but not the naming of the release.
>
> Craig
>
> On May 23, 2007, at 12:30 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>
> >
> > We recently discussed committing ourselves to the next release being 
> > OpenJPA 1.0.0. The general consensus seems to be in favor, so I'm 
> > putting it to a vote.
> >
> >  +1 Make the current release be 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT, which indicates that 
> > the next released version will be 1.0.0
> >  -1 Leave the current release to be 0.9.8-SNAPSHOT  0 Don't care
> >
> > This vote will remain open until 12pm PST on 5/26.
> >
> > I'll start the voting off by recording my vote: +1
> >
> >
>
> Craig Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>
>


-- 
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907


Mime
View raw message