shindig-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Moore <tmo...@atlassian.com>
Subject Re: Proposal To Branch for 1.0 Today
Date Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:57:50 GMT
On Dec 3, 2008, at 9:09 PM, Dan Peterson wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Evan Gilbert <uidude@google.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> Responses below. Again, I don't feel too strongly ("slavish" may be a
>> slightly strong characterization of my points), but I'm not seeing  
>> big
>> benefits in the short term to major releases independent of spec  
>> revisions.
>>
>> The cost of maintaining a release can easily outweigh the benefits of
>> releasing a new architecture earlier, when there is likely a spec rev
>> coming
>> up in a few months. I wouldn't tie down the versions but I do see  
>> benefits
>> in starting with Opensocial Spec Version == Shindig version.
>>
>> Still happy to support the will of the group on this one - just  
>> wanted to
>> make sure that these points were heard.
>>
>
> As stated earlier in this thread, my stance is similar to Evan's --  
> I worry
> that we're going to confuse people by *starting off* with a Shindig  
> version
> that is inflated ahead of the version of the OpenSocial spec. I  
> agree that
> we'd probably not want to hold the Shindig version to be similar to  
> the
> OpenSocial spec version in perpetuity.


I was one of the people originally suggesting to keep the versions  
tied to the spec. I appreciate the arguments against that suggestion,  
and I'd ultimately be happy either way.

But I think the *worst* option would be to start out tied to the spec  
version and then drift away from it. That would be hopelessly confusing.


Thanks,
-- 
Tim Moore
Atlassian Plugin Developer


Mime
View raw message