You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@manifoldcf.apache.org by Piergiorgio Lucidi <pi...@apache.org> on 2012/09/05 11:44:58 UTC
Re: Winding down the 0.7 release, already??
Taking a look at all the recent fixes, I think that we could release a new
version of ManifoldCF because there are many improvements:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+CONNECTORS+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%22ManifoldCF+0.7%22+AND+status+%3D+Resolved+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide
I don't know what rules are defined for calling it as "1.0", but in the
meanwhile we could release a 0.7 version.
Personally I think that this new release could be named 1.0, but this is my
feeling :)
Piergiorgio
2012/8/27 Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
> Hi Folks,
>
> It's already time to start winding down the 0.7 release.
>
> Before this is done, I think we need the following:
>
> (1) Voting on the current outstanding SharePoint-2007 plugin release.
> Still need 2 votes.
> (2) Completion of, and voting on the new SharePoint-2010 plugin release.
> (3) Completion of all outstanding tickets marked "Fix in ManifoldCF 0.7".
>
> I'd also like to explore what the criteria should be for calling a
> release "1.0". It seems to me that Jukka and others might have an
> idea of when this would be appropriate. Does anyone have any thoughts
> on this matter?
>
> Thanks,
> Karl
>
> --
> Piergiorgio Lucidi
> http://www.open4dev.com
>
>
Re: Winding down the 0.7 release, already??
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
Ok, our end-of-the month release is now officially "1.0".
Karl
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Piergiorgio Lucidi
<pi...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1 from me to start releasing the next version as 1.0.
>
> Taking a look at the current algorithm used by Maven for comparing versions
> [1], and at the Versioning page [2], I don't see any problem.
>
> Piergiorgio
>
> [1] -
> http://maven.apache.org/ref/3.0.4/maven-artifact/xref/org/apache/maven/artifact/versioning/DefaultArtifactVersion.html
> [2] - http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Versioning
>
> 2012/9/13 Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
>
>> The more I think about this, the more I think we may well be able to
>> segregate ManifoldCF into "major releases" over time. Some of the
>> very large tickets (for example, multi-server crawling) will almost
>> certainly have a big impact on practically everything ManifoldCF does.
>> I propose, then, that our major releases coincide with these very
>> significant framework changes.
>>
>> That would imply that we can continue to have 0.xxx releases for quite
>> some time, but since we did not plan on such an arrangement in
>> advance, and since we want tools like Maven to work with our version
>> numbers, I propose that we begin the 1.xxx series of releases right
>> now, in this current release. Furthermore, we would include a minor
>> level for patch releases in each version number. For example:
>>
>> 1.0.0 - release on Sept 30
>> 1.1.0 - release on December 31
>> etc.
>>
>> The only question I have is what will Maven's version comparison logic
>> do when it sees a version like this:
>>
>> 1.17.0
>>
>> Hopefully it will recognize that this is a higher version than 1.2.0?
>> Mavenistas, what say you? If Maven doesn't work right with this, we'd
>> want to reserve digits in advance, e.g.
>>
>> 1.000.0
>> 1.001.0
>>
>>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I don't think there are any hard rules about what constitutes a 1.0
>> > release, except perhaps some subjective measure of completeness, and
>> > some measure of backwards compatibility support. For example, Lucene
>> > insures that every major release number (3.x, 4.x) are
>> > index-compatible.
>> >
>> > I don't know what the equivalent major release equivalent would be for
>> > ManifoldCF. We have a mature database schema which self-upgrades, so
>> > that is not going to work in the same way as Lucene indexes. We
>> > *could* just keep counting: 0.7, 0.8. 0.9, 0.10, 0.11 etc. But that
>> > gets cumbersome too.
>> >
>> > Karl
>> >
>> > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Piergiorgio Lucidi
>> > <pi...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> Taking a look at all the recent fixes, I think that we could release a
>> new
>> >> version of ManifoldCF because there are many improvements:
>> >>
>> >>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+CONNECTORS+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%22ManifoldCF+0.7%22+AND+status+%3D+Resolved+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide
>> >>
>> >> I don't know what rules are defined for calling it as "1.0", but in the
>> >> meanwhile we could release a 0.7 version.
>> >> Personally I think that this new release could be named 1.0, but this
>> is my
>> >> feeling :)
>> >>
>> >> Piergiorgio
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2012/8/27 Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
>> >>
>> >>> Hi Folks,
>> >>>
>> >>> It's already time to start winding down the 0.7 release.
>> >>>
>> >>> Before this is done, I think we need the following:
>> >>>
>> >>> (1) Voting on the current outstanding SharePoint-2007 plugin release.
>> >>> Still need 2 votes.
>> >>> (2) Completion of, and voting on the new SharePoint-2010 plugin
>> release.
>> >>> (3) Completion of all outstanding tickets marked "Fix in ManifoldCF
>> 0.7".
>> >>>
>> >>> I'd also like to explore what the criteria should be for calling a
>> >>> release "1.0". It seems to me that Jukka and others might have an
>> >>> idea of when this would be appropriate. Does anyone have any thoughts
>> >>> on this matter?
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> Karl
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Piergiorgio Lucidi
>> >>> http://www.open4dev.com
>> >>>
>> >>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Piergiorgio Lucidi
> http://www.open4dev.com
Re: Winding down the 0.7 release, already??
Posted by Piergiorgio Lucidi <pi...@apache.org>.
+1 from me to start releasing the next version as 1.0.
Taking a look at the current algorithm used by Maven for comparing versions
[1], and at the Versioning page [2], I don't see any problem.
Piergiorgio
[1] -
http://maven.apache.org/ref/3.0.4/maven-artifact/xref/org/apache/maven/artifact/versioning/DefaultArtifactVersion.html
[2] - http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Versioning
2012/9/13 Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
> The more I think about this, the more I think we may well be able to
> segregate ManifoldCF into "major releases" over time. Some of the
> very large tickets (for example, multi-server crawling) will almost
> certainly have a big impact on practically everything ManifoldCF does.
> I propose, then, that our major releases coincide with these very
> significant framework changes.
>
> That would imply that we can continue to have 0.xxx releases for quite
> some time, but since we did not plan on such an arrangement in
> advance, and since we want tools like Maven to work with our version
> numbers, I propose that we begin the 1.xxx series of releases right
> now, in this current release. Furthermore, we would include a minor
> level for patch releases in each version number. For example:
>
> 1.0.0 - release on Sept 30
> 1.1.0 - release on December 31
> etc.
>
> The only question I have is what will Maven's version comparison logic
> do when it sees a version like this:
>
> 1.17.0
>
> Hopefully it will recognize that this is a higher version than 1.2.0?
> Mavenistas, what say you? If Maven doesn't work right with this, we'd
> want to reserve digits in advance, e.g.
>
> 1.000.0
> 1.001.0
>
>
> Karl
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't think there are any hard rules about what constitutes a 1.0
> > release, except perhaps some subjective measure of completeness, and
> > some measure of backwards compatibility support. For example, Lucene
> > insures that every major release number (3.x, 4.x) are
> > index-compatible.
> >
> > I don't know what the equivalent major release equivalent would be for
> > ManifoldCF. We have a mature database schema which self-upgrades, so
> > that is not going to work in the same way as Lucene indexes. We
> > *could* just keep counting: 0.7, 0.8. 0.9, 0.10, 0.11 etc. But that
> > gets cumbersome too.
> >
> > Karl
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Piergiorgio Lucidi
> > <pi...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> Taking a look at all the recent fixes, I think that we could release a
> new
> >> version of ManifoldCF because there are many improvements:
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+CONNECTORS+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%22ManifoldCF+0.7%22+AND+status+%3D+Resolved+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide
> >>
> >> I don't know what rules are defined for calling it as "1.0", but in the
> >> meanwhile we could release a 0.7 version.
> >> Personally I think that this new release could be named 1.0, but this
> is my
> >> feeling :)
> >>
> >> Piergiorgio
> >>
> >>
> >> 2012/8/27 Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
> >>
> >>> Hi Folks,
> >>>
> >>> It's already time to start winding down the 0.7 release.
> >>>
> >>> Before this is done, I think we need the following:
> >>>
> >>> (1) Voting on the current outstanding SharePoint-2007 plugin release.
> >>> Still need 2 votes.
> >>> (2) Completion of, and voting on the new SharePoint-2010 plugin
> release.
> >>> (3) Completion of all outstanding tickets marked "Fix in ManifoldCF
> 0.7".
> >>>
> >>> I'd also like to explore what the criteria should be for calling a
> >>> release "1.0". It seems to me that Jukka and others might have an
> >>> idea of when this would be appropriate. Does anyone have any thoughts
> >>> on this matter?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Karl
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Piergiorgio Lucidi
> >>> http://www.open4dev.com
> >>>
> >>>
>
--
Piergiorgio Lucidi
http://www.open4dev.com
Re: Winding down the 0.7 release, already??
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
The more I think about this, the more I think we may well be able to
segregate ManifoldCF into "major releases" over time. Some of the
very large tickets (for example, multi-server crawling) will almost
certainly have a big impact on practically everything ManifoldCF does.
I propose, then, that our major releases coincide with these very
significant framework changes.
That would imply that we can continue to have 0.xxx releases for quite
some time, but since we did not plan on such an arrangement in
advance, and since we want tools like Maven to work with our version
numbers, I propose that we begin the 1.xxx series of releases right
now, in this current release. Furthermore, we would include a minor
level for patch releases in each version number. For example:
1.0.0 - release on Sept 30
1.1.0 - release on December 31
etc.
The only question I have is what will Maven's version comparison logic
do when it sees a version like this:
1.17.0
Hopefully it will recognize that this is a higher version than 1.2.0?
Mavenistas, what say you? If Maven doesn't work right with this, we'd
want to reserve digits in advance, e.g.
1.000.0
1.001.0
Karl
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think there are any hard rules about what constitutes a 1.0
> release, except perhaps some subjective measure of completeness, and
> some measure of backwards compatibility support. For example, Lucene
> insures that every major release number (3.x, 4.x) are
> index-compatible.
>
> I don't know what the equivalent major release equivalent would be for
> ManifoldCF. We have a mature database schema which self-upgrades, so
> that is not going to work in the same way as Lucene indexes. We
> *could* just keep counting: 0.7, 0.8. 0.9, 0.10, 0.11 etc. But that
> gets cumbersome too.
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Piergiorgio Lucidi
> <pi...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Taking a look at all the recent fixes, I think that we could release a new
>> version of ManifoldCF because there are many improvements:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+CONNECTORS+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%22ManifoldCF+0.7%22+AND+status+%3D+Resolved+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide
>>
>> I don't know what rules are defined for calling it as "1.0", but in the
>> meanwhile we could release a 0.7 version.
>> Personally I think that this new release could be named 1.0, but this is my
>> feeling :)
>>
>> Piergiorgio
>>
>>
>> 2012/8/27 Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> It's already time to start winding down the 0.7 release.
>>>
>>> Before this is done, I think we need the following:
>>>
>>> (1) Voting on the current outstanding SharePoint-2007 plugin release.
>>> Still need 2 votes.
>>> (2) Completion of, and voting on the new SharePoint-2010 plugin release.
>>> (3) Completion of all outstanding tickets marked "Fix in ManifoldCF 0.7".
>>>
>>> I'd also like to explore what the criteria should be for calling a
>>> release "1.0". It seems to me that Jukka and others might have an
>>> idea of when this would be appropriate. Does anyone have any thoughts
>>> on this matter?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> --
>>> Piergiorgio Lucidi
>>> http://www.open4dev.com
>>>
>>>
Re: Winding down the 0.7 release, already??
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
I don't think there are any hard rules about what constitutes a 1.0
release, except perhaps some subjective measure of completeness, and
some measure of backwards compatibility support. For example, Lucene
insures that every major release number (3.x, 4.x) are
index-compatible.
I don't know what the equivalent major release equivalent would be for
ManifoldCF. We have a mature database schema which self-upgrades, so
that is not going to work in the same way as Lucene indexes. We
*could* just keep counting: 0.7, 0.8. 0.9, 0.10, 0.11 etc. But that
gets cumbersome too.
Karl
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Piergiorgio Lucidi
<pi...@apache.org> wrote:
> Taking a look at all the recent fixes, I think that we could release a new
> version of ManifoldCF because there are many improvements:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+CONNECTORS+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%22ManifoldCF+0.7%22+AND+status+%3D+Resolved+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide
>
> I don't know what rules are defined for calling it as "1.0", but in the
> meanwhile we could release a 0.7 version.
> Personally I think that this new release could be named 1.0, but this is my
> feeling :)
>
> Piergiorgio
>
>
> 2012/8/27 Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> It's already time to start winding down the 0.7 release.
>>
>> Before this is done, I think we need the following:
>>
>> (1) Voting on the current outstanding SharePoint-2007 plugin release.
>> Still need 2 votes.
>> (2) Completion of, and voting on the new SharePoint-2010 plugin release.
>> (3) Completion of all outstanding tickets marked "Fix in ManifoldCF 0.7".
>>
>> I'd also like to explore what the criteria should be for calling a
>> release "1.0". It seems to me that Jukka and others might have an
>> idea of when this would be appropriate. Does anyone have any thoughts
>> on this matter?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Karl
>>
>> --
>> Piergiorgio Lucidi
>> http://www.open4dev.com
>>
>>