Mailing-List: contact users-help@qpid.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@qpid.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of gsim@redhat.com designates
 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <547EDF40.4050302@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 10:00:32 +0000
From: Gordon Sim <gsim@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd, Registered in England and Wales under Company
 Registration No. 3798903, Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Matt Parsons
 (USA), Charlie Peters (USA), Michael O'Neill (Ireland)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: Any ETA on a QPid 0.32 release
References: <547CE797.9060108@gmail.com>
 <CAFitrpQQtcy7b4WrKyoQBMhPo7eToJ3zPUg74Z53Px4rZq8m8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACsaS944g8RsHGZnf=0w3qZSt4ea6O-DwH5+EECGb2z4bZL8JQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFitrpSs0+gRBp8naMaijETivrgjOVKARpBDsC9M3ySb13S=zQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <547E0E63.2050101@blueyonder.co.uk> <547E3250.3000803@redhat.com>
 <1026298715.23276845.1417557590117.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1026298715.23276845.1417557590117.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 12/02/2014 09:59 PM, Chuck Rolke wrote:
>> I feel like for qpidd and qpid::messaging at least, a '1.0' at this
>> point is meaningless and even perhaps confusing. They are both well past
>> that really, placing a high priority on stability and backward
>> compatibility. The 1.0 label to me is more appropriate for newer
>> components like proton, dispatch-router and the new JMS client.
>
> There's a certain appeal to having the version number be the year.month
> that the product was branched especially if we have four or five
> closely related products. If some whizzy feature of the broker
> is released in 15.4 then you know that it probably isn't supported in
> dispatch 15.2. There's no way to know that if the broker is 3.2 and
> dispatch is 1.1.

Yes, I can see the value in being able to easily determine ordering 
between release numbers of components on different schedules. Also, it 
may help force a more public schedule, by setting the target date in 
order to determine the next release number.

> My preferences in order are:
>
> 1. All products with 'year'.'month'.
> 2. All products switch to 3.1 on next release and increment independently.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org