aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alasdair Nottingham <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Releasing jmx, blueprint and transaction
Date Wed, 03 Nov 2010 18:40:50 GMT
Perhaps I'm being flippant, but does that mean we can remove the
-incubating from our versions?

I think individual packages should be versioned independently based on
the changes in that package, not the containing bundle. I also don't
have an issue with the current 0 major version indicating an unstable
API.

I personally wouldn't want components that implement a spec to be
released as version 1.0.0 until they comply (meaning it passes all the
valid CT tests) with the specs.

I also think we should have a discussion about what is, and is not,
API. For instance is the blueprint cm support API, or provisional?
Will we support it even if/when the OSGi Alliance produces a standard
(same for namespace handlers). Just posing questions not views here.

Alasdair

On 3 November 2010 17:22, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
> It does and fwiw incubation status should have nothing to do with the
> versioning scheme.
>
> On Wednesday, November 3, 2010, Graham Charters <gcharters@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think at some point we should be adopting the semantic versioning
>> policy recommended by the OSGi Alliance.  Versions under 1.0 seem to
>> be special (in the way we use them at the moment) and seem to imply
>> experimentation and no commitment to backward compatibility (or
>> incubating).  However, on a component-by-component basis, we could
>> decide that they're "done" and release 1.0.  Updates from then on
>> should follow the semantic versioning rules.
>>
>> Does that make sense?
>>
>> On 2 November 2010 23:10, Alasdair Nottingham <not@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I would go with releasing them at version 0.3, or have I missed the point?
>>>
>>> Alasdair
>>>
>>> Alasdair
>>>
>>> On 2 Nov 2010, at 21:14, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think when discussed that a while back, we decided to go with
>>>> individual lifecycles for Aries components.
>>>> I wonder what kind of versioning scheme do we want to follow for that.
>>>> The question arise because I'd like to have the mentioned components
>>>> released in the coming weeks, so unless we start doing a full release
>>>> again, we have to decide how do actually release individual
>>>> components.  Also the Sling team would certainly be happy to have the
>>>> new jmx-whiteboard released as well.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>> ------------------------
>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>>> ------------------------
>>>> Open Source SOA
>>>> http://fusesource.com
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>



-- 
Alasdair Nottingham
not@apache.org

Mime
View raw message