ambari-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jayush Luniya <>
Subject Re: Ambari trunk Snapshot Versioning
Date Thu, 18 Oct 2018 17:51:07 GMT
+1 for #2. 

On 10/18/18, 8:35 AM, "Sandor Molnar" <> wrote:

    +1 for #2
    On 10/18/18, 4:41 PM, "Nate Cole" <> wrote:
        I agree that #2 is a good option.  Version parsing is used in various places, so I
think we should still use a number.  It also makes it clearer to consumers of the spi to know
where to pull in dependencies.
        On 10/17/18, 4:10 PM, "Jonathan Hurley" <> wrote:
            It looks like Ambari’s trunk pom.xml has not been updated with a proper version
in at least 4 years. It currently still lists trunk as
            This poses several problems as we try to make our artifacts more 3rd-party friendly
since it becomes ambiguous what other maven projects are actually depending on. I think that
we need to change our process to keep this version updated with every release of Ambari. Other
Apache projects seem to do this (I took a look at Nifi, Hive, Storm, etc) and in each case,
their trunk pom.xml was at least a minor version ahead of their most recent release branch.
            I see three avenues for us here:
              1.  We can make trunk the next “known” version of Ambari. This gives us
relatively fine grain control over snapshot artifact versioning, but also opens us up to problems
when surprise versions show up. For example, up until a few weeks ago, trunk would have been, however now that we have a 2.8 release off of trunk, we’d need to change
this to
              2.  We can make trunk the next major version, so that it would currently be After 3.0 is released, then it would move to even though
we know that there are interim minor releases coming out (like 3.1, 3.2, etc)
              3.  We can abandon numbering for trunk and use something like TRUNK-SNAPSHOT.
This also poses some ambiguity problems since you actually don’t know from which point in
time the snapshot is really from. There’s also a problem with our regex parsing of the version
if we switch away from the 4-digit scheme we have now.
            I’d like to get some opinions on this topic. I personally think that #2 makes
the most sense.

View raw message