mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Trustin Lee" <trus...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Versioning scheme
Date Sun, 29 Oct 2006 00:16:12 GMT
On 10/29/06, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Trustin Lee a écrit :
>
> > "Some consider bumping the minor number several notches from say a 1.0
> > to a
> > 1.5 for example to connotate a change in platform like switching from
> JDK
> > 1.4 to JDK 5.0. This is also an acceptable tactic to employ."
> >
> > I would rather start from 2.1 than from 1.5 because it shows that it
> > has a
> > big change more clearly.  But we lose 2.0. That's why I talked about
> > switching the meaning of even and odd. :)
>
> Trustin, I think you make a confusion about the meaning of "Stable". In
> our case - delivering a server, an API -, stable means "The
> API/functionnalities won't change for a while". It does not mean "Bug
> free", because reaching a bug free state for a project is like having a
> curve "touching" it's assymptote :)
>
> So we can have a 2.0, without any problem, as we have had a 1.0. (with
> some problems, I must admit ;)


I know what 'stable' means for us.  I had to reply to your message first,
but I missed it by mistake.  Anyway, we need to release a few releases
before we announce the API is stablized enough.  I mean testing the new APIs
to make sure the new API is not impacting other users in a bad way.  So I
think jumping to 2.0 directly doesn't make sense.  Yeah, it might make a
sense if we are all genius.  The reality is that we are not genius and we
will not be able to create great stable API in one shot.  That's why we have
an intermediate version like 1.5 to test the new API or new syntactic
sugars.

When we are talking about unstable, we mean : "Don't dare using this
> version in production, we won't guarantee any bug/function fix in a
> reasonnable timeframe". These odd versions are experimental. It's better
> to have them than to work in branches, because the roadmap is easier to
> define.


Yep.  I agree with your definition.

PS : Of course, all this discussion is purely about semantic. If you
> want some good idea about numbering and meaning of even/odd, I suggest
> you listen "Space Oddity" - David Bowie - and "Stairway to Even" - Led
> Zeppelin - (I know, is 'heaven' ... :)


:D

Trustin
-- 
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP key fingerprints:
* E167 E6AF E73A CBCE EE41  4A29 544D DE48 FE95 4E7E
* B693 628E 6047 4F8F CFA4  455E 1C62 A7DC 0255 ECA6

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message