aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Aries release
Date Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:16:54 GMT
I think it would seem more natural to have a single version across the
components if we will always release those together.  Having different
versions only makes sense if these components are released
independently.
I've seen both happen in different projects.  It seems that having a
single version / release makes our life and our users' life easier
(only one version to remember / upgrade, a single release to do).  It
would also enable us to provide a binary distribution, but it somewhat
makes the release cycle longer as all components need to be ready.   I
 don't really have a strong opinion on that, but i'd rather start with
a single release and later switch to multiple versions if needed.

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 17:58, Alasdair Nottingham <not@apache.org> wrote:
> I think the only component in aries I think could be marked as 1.0 in
> the first release is the blueprint component. However I would like to
> see a discussion about how versioning works, whether we keep it in
> lock step or independently versioned, and linked to this whether the
> sub-components can be released independently of each other before we
> ship blueprint at 1.0 and everything else at 0.1
>
> I don't know how long this discussion would take, but I wouldn't want
> to hold up a first release for a long time to have the discussion
> since it only affects a single component at this time.
>
> Thoughts?
> Alasdair
>
> 2010/1/27 Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>:
>>
>> On Jan 27, 2010, at 3:45 AM, Alasdair Nottingham wrote:
>>
>>> I would not like to do a 1.0 release of components that implement an
>>> OSGi spec, but have not passed compliance. Since a lot of the
>>> specifications are not yet final we should not be releasing 1.0
>>> implementations of those specification.
>>
>> Makes sense to me.
>>
>>> This doesn't apply to blueprint since the spec is final, but for the
>>> other components I think we should stick with 0.1 for now. I do not
>>> have a strong opinion on using separate versioning for the components
>>> right now, but I do think it might make sense for our first release to
>>> be consistent across components.
>>
>> So for blueprint it should be 1.0 and the others 0.1?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>>>
>>> Alasdair
>>>
>>> 2010/1/27 Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>:
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 9:34 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There's been a lot of activity lately so I'd like to propose we do a
>>>>> release so we can get some wider user feedback. I think we should give
>>>>> it a version of 0.1 and stick to versions <1 while we're in the
>>>>> Incubator.
>>>>
>>>> I'm in favor of a release but prefer to call it 1.0.  Why does it matter
>>>> that we're in the incubator?  Just curious.
>>>>
>>>>> Then there is the question of whether to independently version the
>>>>> high level modules or keep them lock-step. For now I think we should
>>>>> keep them lock-step until we feel a need to change that.
>>>>
>>>> I think that there's a strong chance that we will have patch releases
>>>> that
>>>> would affect only one module.  I think it would be odd and confusing if
>>>> the
>>>> versions for the other modules were incremented as well, especially since
>>>> not all the modules will always be consumed together.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>> not@apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alasdair Nottingham
> not@apache.org
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Mime
View raw message