qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carl Trieloff <cctriel...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Version numbers in maven.
Date Mon, 21 May 2007 14:44:48 GMT

Only reason for calling it trunk is that when we get auto- build 
failures posted, then when
we branch there is less config to do and the messages in the log can be 
tracked better. At
the time we branch and create the M3 line we will add a M3 auto build 
target. This gives
as clean way to know and track the health of a release.

Thus I would prefer calling trunk "trunk"

Carl.



Robert Godfrey wrote:
> I also thought about calling it trunk... and to be honest I'm not that
> bothered other than it shouldn't have the same version as the M2 trunk
> build...
>
> My reasoning for accepting M3 on trunk was simply that the approach
> we've used in the past was that the version on trunk has been that of
> the next version we expect to branch off from trunk.
>
> I think the issue is (as you identified) we have two independent
> version identifiers at the moment... the "1.0" and the "M?".
>
> trunk is providing a snapshot of the code as it moves towards the next
> release which will presumably be M3.
>
> Personally I would be happy if we used version numbers on the trunk
> and then only added the M? marker on the branch (I presume the M?
> marker is required to be added ... if it's not, can we just ditch it?)
>
> e.g. M1 could be 1.0, M2 could be version 2.0 ... etc... therefore
> trunk would now become 3.0-SNAPSHOT, and M2 would be 2.0-SNAPSHOT-M2
>
> -- Rob
>
> On 21/05/07, Carl Trieloff <cctrieloff@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Robert,
>>
>> I don't quite get that, why would be not make the next branch the M3
>> snapshot and keep the
>> trunk call trunk? How does it help us calling trunk M3 snapshot
>>
>> Carl
>>
>>
>> Robert Godfrey wrote:
>> > Yes - that makes more sense...  Anyone any objections to changing
>> > trunk to be M3 snapshot?
>> >
>> > -- Rob
>> >
>> > On 21/05/07, Rupert Smith <rupertlssmith@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >> Actually, my mistakes, its happy with whatever you like in front 
>> of the
>> >> -SNAPSHOT. The SNAPSHOT gets replced with a timestamp when you run 
>> 'mvn
>> >> deploy', or to a fixed version when you do 'mvn release'.
>> >>
>> >> Think we should change trunk to 1.0-incubating-M3-SNAPSHOT?
>> >>
>> >> Rupert
>> >>
>> >> On 21/05/07, Rupert Smith <rupertlssmith@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > So 'qpid-broker-incubating' '0.2-SNAPSHOT'? Maybe the position 
>> of the
>> >> > number just needs to be moved so that it comes before the -SNAPSHOT
>> >> bit? '
>> >> > incubating-0.2-SNAPSHOT'? You never know with maven. I'll have a
>> >> little
>> >> > experiment and see what makes it happy.
>> >> >
>> >> > Rupert
>> >> >
>> >> > On 21/05/07, Martin Ritchie <ritchiem@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > We need to have the 'incubating' in our artifact names but i'm
>> >> sure we
>> >> > > can put that some where other than version value.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On 21/05/07, Rupert Smith <rupertlssmith@googlemail.com >
wrote:
>> >> > > > Should we have different version stamps under Maven for trunk
>> >> and M2?
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > I was thinking about this as I rebuild M2 after trunk, to
>> >> ensure that
>> >> > > when I
>> >> > > > built some other stuff against M2 I got the M2 build and
not
>> >> trunk.
>> >> > > Really
>> >> > > > M2 should be a different version to trunk, so I can distinguish
>> >> the
>> >> > > built
>> >> > > > artifacts.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Also, I don't think maven likes the version string
>> >> '1.0-incubating-M2',
>> >> > > it
>> >> > > > seems to want to use the decimal(ish) system, for example,
'
>> >> 0.2', for
>> >> > > its
>> >> > > > version ranges and so on to work. I think something is wrong
>> >> with the
>> >> > > way it
>> >> > > > parses the dashes in the name as it takes our version literally
>> >> as '
>> >> > > > 1.0-incubating-M2-SNAPSHOT', instead of recognising it as
a
>> >> SNAPSHOT
>> >> > > and
>> >> > > > replacing the SNAPSHOT with a timestamp on every build. Seems
>> >> like we
>> >> > > need
>> >> > > > 0.2-SNAPSHOT for the M2 branch, and 0.3-SNAPSHOT for trunk.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Is it too controversial to change it?
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Rupert
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > Martin Ritchie
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>>
>>


Mime
View raw message