qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rajith Attapattu <rajit...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: version number proposal
Date Tue, 03 Feb 2009 01:36:35 GMT
I would agree with Rafi.
If we jump straightaway to 1.x and continue from there, people will start to
expect API compatibility.
I don't think Qpid is in a position to make such guarantee.

I also agree that we should not follow AMQP versions. Our version has to be
independent of AMQP.
BUT I think we should wait to do a Qpid 1.0 release until AMQP 1.0 .
Once AMQP settles down with 1.0 (and provide compatibility between minor
versions) it will make life easy for Qpid to maintain API compatibility for
python, ruby and c++. After that Qpid can do any amount of releases
independent of AMQP versions.



On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Rafael Schloming <rafaels@redhat.com> wrote:

> Steve Huston wrote:
>> Hi Carl,
>>  Short and sweet... I propose we move from Mx naming and with M5 move to
>>> 1.5 then 1.6 and so forth.
>>> any takers?
>> Another possibility... Go to 0.5, 0.6, etc. until a version is done
>> that supports AMQP 1.0 and that is Qpid 1.0.
> I think this would make a bit more sense. For me at least versions like 1.5
> and 1.6 imply a level of API compatibility and client/server interop that
> goes beyond what we currently test for in our releases.
> --Rafael
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org


Rajith Attapattu
Red Hat

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