qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aidan Skinner <ai...@apache.org>
Subject Changing the release numbering scheme (was Re: [VOTE] Version Numbers)
Date Mon, 09 Feb 2009 23:12:19 GMT
(moving this to another thread so as to make tallying the vote easier)

On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Robert Greig <robert.j.greig@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2009/2/9 Robert Godfrey <rob.j.godfrey@gmail.com>:
>
>> I'd rather stay on M5 and work towards a release which can be > 1.0
>
> I think it would be good to have a discussion - hopefully leading to
> consensus (!) - on what people think we need to have achieved to merit
> a 1.x release. To my mind, if people agree those items and they are
> different from what is in scope in our next release, that implies we
> don't have the correct focus for our next release(s).

I think that's a separate issue. We do need to talk about our release
process a bit more, but that's probably best done in another thread.
Possibly this one: http://markmail.org/message/5bxobdc23rgbmqu7

> My own view is that Mx is a weak numbering scheme - something I have
> always felt and I have no idea why incubator projects have to be
> numbered (or should I say encumbered) in such a way. I am not sure

They're not. I'm not sure where that idea originated, but it's never
been a requirement for podlings to release Mx numbered artifacts. I
think the "all podling release have to be M.x releases" fallacy is an
instance of the monkey/hose/banana problem[1].

> I also seem to recall that some people brought up the point a while
> ago that certain unix package systems (e.g. rpm) only work with an
> x.y.z release numbering scheme, so we already have some use of an
> alternative scheme (or am I mistaken)?

RPM can deal with a lot of things in the version number, it's autoconf
that's a problem. The C++ bits already ship as 0.x artifacts as a
result. The main uncontroversial reason I can put forward for dropping
the M at this point is that then we have a consistent number across
all the bits, which is nice.

- Aidan

[1] http://www.b-list.org/weblog/2008/dec/05/python-3000/
-- 
Apache Qpid - World Domination through Advanced Message Queueing
http://qpid.apache.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org


Mime
View raw message