You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tuscany.apache.org by ant elder <an...@gmail.com> on 2008/06/04 13:01:12 UTC
Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need to
remove "incubating" at some point and as its not clear if the next release
would be 2.0 or something else so i wondered if we should also remove the
2.0 giving a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT"? Any comments on that or the
timeframe for doing the change? I'd like to do it nowish so we have some
time to discover any problems before the next release.
...ant
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> The good thing about having a version on the pom is that you can have
> multiple SNAPSHOTs available in a maven repo (e.g 1.2-SNAPSHOT,
> 1.2.1-SNAPSHOT, TRUNK x-SNAPSHOT and TRUNK y-SNAPSHOT), this also
> allows for multiple active development streams.
>
> If you have SNAPSHOT only, I guess you are restricted to only latest
> SNAPSHOT, and I also don't see how you would be able to have multiple
> active development streams in this case.
>
>
Well I don't think we should be having "multiple active development streams"
:) Fine to have historic 1.x, 2.x, 3.x etc branches which are kept alive for
maintenance, and that will work fine with trunk being just SNAPSHOT. But
we're a small group of active committers still learning how to get consensus
on things and i worry it could easily end quite badly if we have multiple
trunks all being developed in parralel competing to be the next new version.
...ant
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Luciano had a good point that if we keep the version prefix for the
SNAPSHOT, we can publish them onto the snapshot repos so that other projects
can use it. +1 to keep the version prefix.
Thanks,
Raymond
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:59 AM
To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to
SNAPSHOT
> The good thing about having a version on the pom is that you can have
> multiple SNAPSHOTs available in a maven repo (e.g 1.2-SNAPSHOT,
> 1.2.1-SNAPSHOT, TRUNK x-SNAPSHOT and TRUNK y-SNAPSHOT), this also
> allows for multiple active development streams.
>
> If you have SNAPSHOT only, I guess you are restricted to only latest
> SNAPSHOT, and I also don't see how you would be able to have multiple
> active development streams in this case.
>
> As for what's our next release, I think this is decided when we cut a
> branch and our SNAPSHOT pom version should not be dictating it. I
> guess having 2.0-SNAPSHOT would just allow us to have multiple
> releases without having to change trunk pom multiple times, and only
> changing the branch when we know what would be the version of the
> release, otherwise, we would have to bum trunk version on every
> release.
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 7:33 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> 2008/6/4 ant elder <an...@gmail.com>:
>>> > Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need
>>> > to
>>> > remove "incubating" at some point and as its not clear if the next
>>> release
>>> > would be 2.0 or something else so i wondered if we should also remove
>>> > the
>>> > 2.0 giving a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT"? Any comments on that
>>> > or
>>> the
>>> > timeframe for doing the change? I'd like to do it nowish so we have
>>> > some
>>> > time to discover any problems before the next release.
>>> >
>>> > ...ant
>>> >
>>>
>>> Hi ant,
>>> could you try a fresh build from svn?
>>> I've some problems with and I 'd go on with my work before we're
>>> arriving to 2.0.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ciao,
>>> Giorgio.
>>> ---
>>> "Venceremos adelante, o victoria o muerte!"
>>>
>>
>> I agree that it doesn't feel like the next release will be 2.0
>> I would prefer that we keep the trunk compatible with our 1.X level APIs
>> for
>> the time being as it feels like there is still a more 1.X releases to do
>> If people are going to start making breaking changes in a branch (we
>> discussed this under the 2.0 thread but it's not happening yet) then it
>> would be useful to me to have the trunk poms marked with 1.X SNAPSHOT so
>> that I know by looking on my disc what I'm working with
>> When (if?) the time comes down the line to break from our 1.X APIs we
>> could
>> then go to SNAPSHOT or 2.0 SNAPSHOT
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Simon
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> Apache Tuscany Committer
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
The good thing about having a version on the pom is that you can have
multiple SNAPSHOTs available in a maven repo (e.g 1.2-SNAPSHOT,
1.2.1-SNAPSHOT, TRUNK x-SNAPSHOT and TRUNK y-SNAPSHOT), this also
allows for multiple active development streams.
If you have SNAPSHOT only, I guess you are restricted to only latest
SNAPSHOT, and I also don't see how you would be able to have multiple
active development streams in this case.
As for what's our next release, I think this is decided when we cut a
branch and our SNAPSHOT pom version should not be dictating it. I
guess having 2.0-SNAPSHOT would just allow us to have multiple
releases without having to change trunk pom multiple times, and only
changing the branch when we know what would be the version of the
release, otherwise, we would have to bum trunk version on every
release.
Thoughts ?
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 7:33 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> 2008/6/4 ant elder <an...@gmail.com>:
>> > Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need to
>> > remove "incubating" at some point and as its not clear if the next
>> release
>> > would be 2.0 or something else so i wondered if we should also remove the
>> > 2.0 giving a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT"? Any comments on that or
>> the
>> > timeframe for doing the change? I'd like to do it nowish so we have some
>> > time to discover any problems before the next release.
>> >
>> > ...ant
>> >
>>
>> Hi ant,
>> could you try a fresh build from svn?
>> I've some problems with and I 'd go on with my work before we're
>> arriving to 2.0.
>>
>>
>> Ciao,
>> Giorgio.
>> ---
>> "Venceremos adelante, o victoria o muerte!"
>>
>
> I agree that it doesn't feel like the next release will be 2.0
> I would prefer that we keep the trunk compatible with our 1.X level APIs for
> the time being as it feels like there is still a more 1.X releases to do
> If people are going to start making breaking changes in a branch (we
> discussed this under the 2.0 thread but it's not happening yet) then it
> would be useful to me to have the trunk poms marked with 1.X SNAPSHOT so
> that I know by looking on my disc what I'm working with
> When (if?) the time comes down the line to break from our 1.X APIs we could
> then go to SNAPSHOT or 2.0 SNAPSHOT
>
> Regards
>
> Simon
>
--
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Simon Nash <na...@apache.org>.
Simon Laws wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
>> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
>> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
>>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
>>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
>>>> release would be 2.0.
>>>
>>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of an
>>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT as
>> the
>>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on a
>> 2.0
>>> in trunk.
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Luciano Resende
>> Apache Tuscany Committer
>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende>
>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>>
>
> My feeling about this have been galvanized by our previous conversations
> about doing some development work at some point in the future to improve the
> APIs/SPIs in backwardly incompatible ways. We previously discussed this
> under the banner of a 2.0 code base which still sounds sensible. If we do
> that at some point in the future then we will have a 1.X code based which
> our existing users will rely on and a 2.X code base which our users may move
> to over time. I'd like it to be clear when working on a code base, making
> releases from a code base or just providing snapshots what flavour of
> Tuscany is involved. Releases take care of themselves but this is why I'd
> like to see some reference to version 1 in Trunk be maintained. We don't
> commit to a particular release number until the start discussing each
> release and cut the branch. Hence that's why I was happy with using 1.X.
>
> Regards
>
> Simon
>
I also think 1.x is better than 1.5.
Simon
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
>
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
> >> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
> >> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
> >> release would be 2.0.
> >
> >
> > I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of an
> > unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT as
> the
> > trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on a
> 2.0
> > in trunk.
> >
> > ...ant
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> Apache Tuscany Committer
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende>
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
My feeling about this have been galvanized by our previous conversations
about doing some development work at some point in the future to improve the
APIs/SPIs in backwardly incompatible ways. We previously discussed this
under the banner of a 2.0 code base which still sounds sensible. If we do
that at some point in the future then we will have a 1.X code based which
our existing users will rely on and a 2.X code base which our users may move
to over time. I'd like it to be clear when working on a code base, making
releases from a code base or just providing snapshots what flavour of
Tuscany is involved. Releases take care of themselves but this is why I'd
like to see some reference to version 1 in Trunk be maintained. We don't
commit to a particular release number until the start discussing each
release and cut the branch. Hence that's why I was happy with using 1.X.
Regards
Simon
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
That seems a little odd to me, i'd prefer just "snapshot", 1.x, or the
actual next number over 1.5.
...ant
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
>
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
> >> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
> >> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
> >> release would be 2.0.
> >
> >
> > I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of an
> > unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT as
> the
> > trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on a
> 2.0
> > in trunk.
> >
> > ...ant
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> Apache Tuscany Committer
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende>
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
Trunk is now 1.4-SNAPSHOT in r667767 and a fresh build runs ok for me.
Based on all this thread 1.4-SNAPSHOT isn't perfect but seemed what there
was best consensus for right now. Feel free to revisit and I'd be happy to
do the work to change trunk version to something else if anyone can get
consensus on something else.
...ant
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
rajinisivaram@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 6/13/08, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Are the OSGI "real" versions required to be numeric, which would also mean
>> 1.x wouldn't work so well as a version for OSGi right?
>
>
> Yes, the versions need to be numeric, 1.x wont work.
>
> ...ant
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
>> rajinisivaram@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Ant,
>> >
>> > I am not sure how relevant this is, but in the context of versioning
>> > Tuscany
>> > for OSGi, Tuscany modules are being built as OSGi bundles with "real"
>> > versions (eg. the current build uses "2.0"). The version used is not
>> > currently derived from the maven version, instead it is specified
>> > independently as a property in modules/pom.xml - so it won't actually
>> break
>> > if you modified 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT. But it will become
>> > less
>> > obvious to OSGi users what version a Tuscany build really is. We will
>> need
>> > a
>> > real version for the snapshot builds for building OSGi bundles
>> regardless
>> > of
>> > whether we use that as the version for maven. The question is whether we
>> > need OSGi build versioning to be consistent with maven versions - OSGi
>> > users
>> > building against Tuscany 1.4-SNAPSHOT probably expect to use the 1.4
>> > release, while non-OSGi users as you say may expect to use the latest
>> > SNAPSHOT. Anyway, I just thought I will point this out, I dont actually
>> > mind
>> > either way.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 6/13/08, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
>> > > > jsdelfino@apache.org> wrote:
>> > > > > Luciano Resende wrote:
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to
>> > have
>> > > > >> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk
>> pom
>> > > > >> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <
>> > > luckbr1975@gmail.com>
>> > > > >>> wrote:
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume
>> > that
>> > > > >>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our
>> next
>> > > > >>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our
>> next
>> > > > >>>> release would be 2.0.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that
>> much
>> > of
>> > > > an
>> > > > >>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have
>> > 2.0-SNAPSHOT
>> > > as
>> > > > >>> the
>> > > > >>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start
>> working
>> > on
>> > > a
>> > > > >>> 2.0
>> > > > >>> in trunk.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> ...ant
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'd prefer the next logical number, 1.3 for example.
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > I still think plain SNAPSHOT would be simplest but as no one else
>> seems
>> > > to
>> > > > like that I think I agree with this - the next logical number seems
>> > > better
>> > > > than things like 1.x or 2.0 etc. So, I plan to change trunk to
>> > > 1.4-SNAPSHOT
>> > > > when the 1.3 branch is taken, do say if you really don't like this
>> but
>> > > its
>> > > > what we've been doing most of the time in the past so i hope most
>> can
>> > > live
>> > > > with it.
>> > > >
>> > > > ...ant
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > I've been asked off list to highlight an issue that may not have been
>> > clear
>> > > from whats already been said in this thread.
>> > >
>> > > If we use 1.4-SNAPSHOT in trunk then external people who want to stay
>> up
>> > to
>> > > date with the latest code will use that version in their dependencies.
>> > They
>> > > may not pay that close attention to the dev list so when we create the
>> > > branch for a real 1.4 release and change the trunk to 1.5-SNAPSHOT the
>> > > users
>> > > dependencies will still use 1.4-SNAPSHOT but now instead of getting
>> the
>> > > latest code they're getting the stable branch code. One way this could
>> be
>> > > avoided is by using a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT". Is anyone
>> > really
>> > > against SNAPSHOT if we went for that instead of 1.4-SNAPSHOT?
>> > >
>> > > ...ant
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Thank you...
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Rajini
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thank you...
>
> Regards,
>
> Rajini
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Rajini Sivaram <ra...@googlemail.com>.
On 6/13/08, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Are the OSGI "real" versions required to be numeric, which would also mean
> 1.x wouldn't work so well as a version for OSGi right?
Yes, the versions need to be numeric, 1.x wont work.
...ant
>
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
> rajinisivaram@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Ant,
> >
> > I am not sure how relevant this is, but in the context of versioning
> > Tuscany
> > for OSGi, Tuscany modules are being built as OSGi bundles with "real"
> > versions (eg. the current build uses "2.0"). The version used is not
> > currently derived from the maven version, instead it is specified
> > independently as a property in modules/pom.xml - so it won't actually
> break
> > if you modified 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT. But it will become
> > less
> > obvious to OSGi users what version a Tuscany build really is. We will
> need
> > a
> > real version for the snapshot builds for building OSGi bundles regardless
> > of
> > whether we use that as the version for maven. The question is whether we
> > need OSGi build versioning to be consistent with maven versions - OSGi
> > users
> > building against Tuscany 1.4-SNAPSHOT probably expect to use the 1.4
> > release, while non-OSGi users as you say may expect to use the latest
> > SNAPSHOT. Anyway, I just thought I will point this out, I dont actually
> > mind
> > either way.
> >
> >
> > On 6/13/08, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> > > > jsdelfino@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > Luciano Resende wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to
> > have
> > > > >> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk
> pom
> > > > >> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <
> > > luckbr1975@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume
> > that
> > > > >>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our
> next
> > > > >>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
> > > > >>>> release would be 2.0.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that
> much
> > of
> > > > an
> > > > >>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have
> > 2.0-SNAPSHOT
> > > as
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working
> > on
> > > a
> > > > >>> 2.0
> > > > >>> in trunk.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> ...ant
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd prefer the next logical number, 1.3 for example.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I still think plain SNAPSHOT would be simplest but as no one else
> seems
> > > to
> > > > like that I think I agree with this - the next logical number seems
> > > better
> > > > than things like 1.x or 2.0 etc. So, I plan to change trunk to
> > > 1.4-SNAPSHOT
> > > > when the 1.3 branch is taken, do say if you really don't like this
> but
> > > its
> > > > what we've been doing most of the time in the past so i hope most can
> > > live
> > > > with it.
> > > >
> > > > ...ant
> > > >
> > > >
> > > I've been asked off list to highlight an issue that may not have been
> > clear
> > > from whats already been said in this thread.
> > >
> > > If we use 1.4-SNAPSHOT in trunk then external people who want to stay
> up
> > to
> > > date with the latest code will use that version in their dependencies.
> > They
> > > may not pay that close attention to the dev list so when we create the
> > > branch for a real 1.4 release and change the trunk to 1.5-SNAPSHOT the
> > > users
> > > dependencies will still use 1.4-SNAPSHOT but now instead of getting the
> > > latest code they're getting the stable branch code. One way this could
> be
> > > avoided is by using a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT". Is anyone
> > really
> > > against SNAPSHOT if we went for that instead of 1.4-SNAPSHOT?
> > >
> > > ...ant
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thank you...
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Rajini
> >
>
--
Thank you...
Regards,
Rajini
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
Are the OSGI "real" versions required to be numeric, which would also mean
1.x wouldn't work so well as a version for OSGi right?
...ant
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
rajinisivaram@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Ant,
>
> I am not sure how relevant this is, but in the context of versioning
> Tuscany
> for OSGi, Tuscany modules are being built as OSGi bundles with "real"
> versions (eg. the current build uses "2.0"). The version used is not
> currently derived from the maven version, instead it is specified
> independently as a property in modules/pom.xml - so it won't actually break
> if you modified 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT. But it will become
> less
> obvious to OSGi users what version a Tuscany build really is. We will need
> a
> real version for the snapshot builds for building OSGi bundles regardless
> of
> whether we use that as the version for maven. The question is whether we
> need OSGi build versioning to be consistent with maven versions - OSGi
> users
> building against Tuscany 1.4-SNAPSHOT probably expect to use the 1.4
> release, while non-OSGi users as you say may expect to use the latest
> SNAPSHOT. Anyway, I just thought I will point this out, I dont actually
> mind
> either way.
>
>
> On 6/13/08, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> > > jsdelfino@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > Luciano Resende wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to
> have
> > > >> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
> > > >> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <
> > luckbr1975@gmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume
> that
> > > >>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
> > > >>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
> > > >>>> release would be 2.0.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much
> of
> > > an
> > > >>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have
> 2.0-SNAPSHOT
> > as
> > > >>> the
> > > >>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working
> on
> > a
> > > >>> 2.0
> > > >>> in trunk.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> ...ant
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I'd prefer the next logical number, 1.3 for example.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I still think plain SNAPSHOT would be simplest but as no one else seems
> > to
> > > like that I think I agree with this - the next logical number seems
> > better
> > > than things like 1.x or 2.0 etc. So, I plan to change trunk to
> > 1.4-SNAPSHOT
> > > when the 1.3 branch is taken, do say if you really don't like this but
> > its
> > > what we've been doing most of the time in the past so i hope most can
> > live
> > > with it.
> > >
> > > ...ant
> > >
> > >
> > I've been asked off list to highlight an issue that may not have been
> clear
> > from whats already been said in this thread.
> >
> > If we use 1.4-SNAPSHOT in trunk then external people who want to stay up
> to
> > date with the latest code will use that version in their dependencies.
> They
> > may not pay that close attention to the dev list so when we create the
> > branch for a real 1.4 release and change the trunk to 1.5-SNAPSHOT the
> > users
> > dependencies will still use 1.4-SNAPSHOT but now instead of getting the
> > latest code they're getting the stable branch code. One way this could be
> > avoided is by using a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT". Is anyone
> really
> > against SNAPSHOT if we went for that instead of 1.4-SNAPSHOT?
> >
> > ...ant
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thank you...
>
> Regards,
>
> Rajini
>
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 8:48 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> > jsdelfino@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Luciano Resende wrote:
> > >>
> > >> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> > >> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
> > >> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <
> luckbr1975@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
> > >>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
> > >>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
> > >>>> release would be 2.0.
> > >>>
> > >>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of
> > an
> > >>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT
> as
> > >>> the
> > >>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on
> a
> > >>> 2.0
> > >>> in trunk.
> > >>>
> > >>> ...ant
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > I'd prefer the next logical number, 1.3 for example.
> > >
> >
> > I still think plain SNAPSHOT would be simplest but as no one else seems
> to
> > like that I think I agree with this - the next logical number seems
> better
> > than things like 1.x or 2.0 etc. So, I plan to change trunk to
> 1.4-SNAPSHOT
> > when the 1.3 branch is taken, do say if you really don't like this but
> its
> > what we've been doing most of the time in the past so i hope most can
> live
> > with it.
> >
> > ...ant
> >
> >
> I've been asked off list to highlight an issue that may not have been clear
> from whats already been said in this thread.
>
> If we use 1.4-SNAPSHOT in trunk then external people who want to stay up to
> date with the latest code will use that version in their dependencies. They
> may not pay that close attention to the dev list so when we create the
> branch for a real 1.4 release and change the trunk to 1.5-SNAPSHOT the
> users
> dependencies will still use 1.4-SNAPSHOT but now instead of getting the
> latest code they're getting the stable branch code. One way this could be
> avoided is by using a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT". Is anyone really
> against SNAPSHOT if we went for that instead of 1.4-SNAPSHOT?
>
> ...ant
>
There is maybe a reason why this conversation has been problematic. Two
conflicting requirements
Requirement1: Avoid us updating trunk poms everytime we do a release.
Consequently avoid snapshot users updating their poms
Requirement2: Clearly identify that artifacts are SPI compatible with the
1.X stream of development.
Solution1: Change artifact version to SNAPSHOT (R1 = Y, R2 = N)
Solution1a: if we do start incompatible developement 1.X development will
stop (R1 = Y, R2 = Y)
Solution1b: if we do start incompatible developement 1.X development will
continue in a specifically versioned branch 1.4-SNAPSHOT (R1 = Y, R2 = Y)
Solution1c: if we do start incompatible development it will be under a
different group id (R1 = Y, R2 = Y)
Solution2: Change artifact version to 1.4-SNAPSHOT (R1 = N, R2 = Y)
Solution3: Change artifact version to 1.X-SNAPSHOT (R1 = Y, R2 = Y)
I am NOT promoting that we start incompatible development. I'm pointing out
that the thought has an impact on this issue. We have discussed 2.0 on the
list before and I believe the sentiment is we go as far as we can with 1.X
with people innovating in their sandboxes and merging back into 1.X trunk.
There may be some new
feature/organization/thought/philosophy/sentiment/architecture etc. that
someone comes up with down the line that means this isn't possible. At that
point we have to decide if we want that piece badly enough to start 2.0.
Simon.
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Rajini Sivaram <ra...@googlemail.com>.
Ant,
I am not sure how relevant this is, but in the context of versioning Tuscany
for OSGi, Tuscany modules are being built as OSGi bundles with "real"
versions (eg. the current build uses "2.0"). The version used is not
currently derived from the maven version, instead it is specified
independently as a property in modules/pom.xml - so it won't actually break
if you modified 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT. But it will become less
obvious to OSGi users what version a Tuscany build really is. We will need a
real version for the snapshot builds for building OSGi bundles regardless of
whether we use that as the version for maven. The question is whether we
need OSGi build versioning to be consistent with maven versions - OSGi users
building against Tuscany 1.4-SNAPSHOT probably expect to use the 1.4
release, while non-OSGi users as you say may expect to use the latest
SNAPSHOT. Anyway, I just thought I will point this out, I dont actually mind
either way.
On 6/13/08, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> > jsdelfino@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Luciano Resende wrote:
> > >>
> > >> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> > >> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
> > >> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <
> luckbr1975@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
> > >>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
> > >>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
> > >>>> release would be 2.0.
> > >>>
> > >>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of
> > an
> > >>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT
> as
> > >>> the
> > >>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on
> a
> > >>> 2.0
> > >>> in trunk.
> > >>>
> > >>> ...ant
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > I'd prefer the next logical number, 1.3 for example.
> > >
> >
> > I still think plain SNAPSHOT would be simplest but as no one else seems
> to
> > like that I think I agree with this - the next logical number seems
> better
> > than things like 1.x or 2.0 etc. So, I plan to change trunk to
> 1.4-SNAPSHOT
> > when the 1.3 branch is taken, do say if you really don't like this but
> its
> > what we've been doing most of the time in the past so i hope most can
> live
> > with it.
> >
> > ...ant
> >
> >
> I've been asked off list to highlight an issue that may not have been clear
> from whats already been said in this thread.
>
> If we use 1.4-SNAPSHOT in trunk then external people who want to stay up to
> date with the latest code will use that version in their dependencies. They
> may not pay that close attention to the dev list so when we create the
> branch for a real 1.4 release and change the trunk to 1.5-SNAPSHOT the
> users
> dependencies will still use 1.4-SNAPSHOT but now instead of getting the
> latest code they're getting the stable branch code. One way this could be
> avoided is by using a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT". Is anyone really
> against SNAPSHOT if we went for that instead of 1.4-SNAPSHOT?
>
> ...ant
>
--
Thank you...
Regards,
Rajini
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> jsdelfino@apache.org> wrote:
> > Luciano Resende wrote:
> >>
> >> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> >> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
> >> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
> >>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
> >>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
> >>>> release would be 2.0.
> >>>
> >>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of
> an
> >>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT as
> >>> the
> >>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on a
> >>> 2.0
> >>> in trunk.
> >>>
> >>> ...ant
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I'd prefer the next logical number, 1.3 for example.
> >
>
> I still think plain SNAPSHOT would be simplest but as no one else seems to
> like that I think I agree with this - the next logical number seems better
> than things like 1.x or 2.0 etc. So, I plan to change trunk to 1.4-SNAPSHOT
> when the 1.3 branch is taken, do say if you really don't like this but its
> what we've been doing most of the time in the past so i hope most can live
> with it.
>
> ...ant
>
>
I've been asked off list to highlight an issue that may not have been clear
from whats already been said in this thread.
If we use 1.4-SNAPSHOT in trunk then external people who want to stay up to
date with the latest code will use that version in their dependencies. They
may not pay that close attention to the dev list so when we create the
branch for a real 1.4 release and change the trunk to 1.5-SNAPSHOT the users
dependencies will still use 1.4-SNAPSHOT but now instead of getting the
latest code they're getting the stable branch code. One way this could be
avoided is by using a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT". Is anyone really
against SNAPSHOT if we went for that instead of 1.4-SNAPSHOT?
...ant
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by haleh mahbod <hm...@gmail.com>.
I am not intimately involved in day to day coding and I am not attached to
any of the branches or the names :) So, take this comment as a 3rd person's
point of view.
1.x relays the message that 1.0 and incremental releases of 1.0 are spawned
off of this version of the code.
2.x relays the message that 2.0 and incremental releases of 2.0 are spawned
off of this version of the code.
It is the reality that at some point in any software's life cycle, a new
architecture and potentially incompatible SPIs/APIs, will come to life
based on experiences learned from the existing software. Therefore, at some
point there will be a 2.x version of Tuscany and it is better to not cause
confusion.
On 6/6/08, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org> wrote:
> Luciano Resende wrote:
>
>> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
>> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
>> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
>>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
>>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
>>>> release would be 2.0.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of an
>>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT as
>>> the
>>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on a
>>> 2.0
>>> in trunk.
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> I'd prefer the next logical number, 1.3 for example.
>
> --
> Jean-Sebastien
>
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> jsdelfino@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Luciano Resende wrote:
> >>
> >> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> >> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
> >> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
> >>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
> >>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
> >>>> release would be 2.0.
> >>>
> >>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of
> an
> >>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT as
> >>> the
> >>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on a
> >>> 2.0
> >>> in trunk.
> >>>
> >>> ...ant
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I'd prefer the next logical number, 1.3 for example.
> >
>
> I still think plain SNAPSHOT would be simplest but as no one else seems to
> like that I think I agree with this - the next logical number seems better
> than things like 1.x or 2.0 etc. So, I plan to change trunk to 1.4-SNAPSHOT
> when the 1.3 branch is taken, do say if you really don't like this but its
> what we've been doing most of the time in the past so i hope most can live
> with it.
>
> ...ant
>
1.4-SNAPSHOT is OK by me.
Simon
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Luciano Resende wrote:
>>
>> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
>> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
>> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
>>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
>>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
>>>> release would be 2.0.
>>>
>>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of an
>>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT as
>>> the
>>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on a
>>> 2.0
>>> in trunk.
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> I'd prefer the next logical number, 1.3 for example.
>
I still think plain SNAPSHOT would be simplest but as no one else seems to
like that I think I agree with this - the next logical number seems better
than things like 1.x or 2.0 etc. So, I plan to change trunk to 1.4-SNAPSHOT
when the 1.3 branch is taken, do say if you really don't like this but its
what we've been doing most of the time in the past so i hope most can live
with it.
...ant
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>.
Luciano Resende wrote:
> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
>
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
>>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
>>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
>>> release would be 2.0.
>>
>> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of an
>> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT as the
>> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on a 2.0
>> in trunk.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>
>
>
I'd prefer the next logical number, 1.3 for example.
--
Jean-Sebastien
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
>> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
>> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
>> release would be 2.0.
>
>
> I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of an
> unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT as the
> trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on a 2.0
> in trunk.
>
> ...ant
>
--
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
> release would be 2.0.
I agree, this is exactly the issue. But I'm not sure its that much of an
unreasonable assumption, it does feel odd to me to have 2.0-SNAPSHOT as the
trunk version before there has been any decision to start working on a 2.0
in trunk.
...ant
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
release would be 2.0. But I tend to take these two pieces as two
different things, the maven pom version is a maven requirement, and
the release version is discussed at some point by the community and
would be set during branching for the release.
Now, let's get back to a scenario, and just use Tuscany SCA before 1.0
release. Although we had 1.0-SNAPSHOT in the maven pom, we were
discussing the releases, and properly setting the right pom version
when we were creating the branches (e.g 0.90, 0.91, etc)
This is just to say why I think it would be ok to leave the pom
version as 2.0-SNAPSHOT.
But I don't have strong feelings, as long as there is some prefix to
the pom version. So if people would like to move it as 1.x-SNAPSHOT or
1.some number-SNAPSHOT I'm +1.
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 12:44 AM, Mike Edwards
<mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ant,
>
> +1 in general - by why not simply choose a number, rather than "x"?
> - the problem with "x" is "what comes next?"
>
> Yours, Mike.
>
> ant elder wrote:
>>
>> Lots of different views so far on this thread, better than no one replying
>> :) I'm tempted to go with "1.x-SNAPSHOT" as I think from whats been said
>> most would be ok with that, please say if you would _not_ be unhappy with
>> it. Note that all other projects I've looked at use either a specific
>> numeric number followed by the "-SNAPSHOT" suffix, or else just the string
>> "SNAPSHOT" for the trunk version, so having the letter "x" as part of our
>> version number makes for an "unusual" version name. Don't see why it
>> shouldn't work though.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>
>
--
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
Which number?
If we pick the next number - we've just done a 1.2 release so the trunk
version could now be "1.3-SNAPSHOT" which is the way we've done in the past
- then every time we branch for the next release we also have to update the
trunk. Thats a bit more work but also it means that *everyone* who has a
dependency on Tuscany which specifies the trunk snapshot version now also
has to notice we've changed and make a corresponding change to their
dependency version.
Personally I like the simple "SNAPSHOT" as it lets you get the latest
development code without having to pay close attention to whats going on in
trunk or ever touch the trunk version again. But using "1.x-SNAPSHOT" would
also mostly avoid both of those problems mentioned above.
...ant
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Mike Edwards <
mike.edwards.inglenook@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ant,
>
> +1 in general - by why not simply choose a number, rather than "x"?
> - the problem with "x" is "what comes next?"
>
> Yours, Mike.
>
>
> ant elder wrote:
>
>>
>> Lots of different views so far on this thread, better than no one replying
>> :) I'm tempted to go with "1.x-SNAPSHOT" as I think from whats been said
>> most would be ok with that, please say if you would _not_ be unhappy with
>> it. Note that all other projects I've looked at use either a specific
>> numeric number followed by the "-SNAPSHOT" suffix, or else just the string
>> "SNAPSHOT" for the trunk version, so having the letter "x" as part of our
>> version number makes for an "unusual" version name. Don't see why it
>> shouldn't work though.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>>
>
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Mike Edwards <mi...@gmail.com>.
Ant,
+1 in general - by why not simply choose a number, rather than "x"?
- the problem with "x" is "what comes next?"
Yours, Mike.
ant elder wrote:
>
> Lots of different views so far on this thread, better than no one replying
> :) I'm tempted to go with "1.x-SNAPSHOT" as I think from whats been said
> most would be ok with that, please say if you would _not_ be unhappy with
> it. Note that all other projects I've looked at use either a specific
> numeric number followed by the "-SNAPSHOT" suffix, or else just the string
> "SNAPSHOT" for the trunk version, so having the letter "x" as part of our
> version number makes for an "unusual" version name. Don't see why it
> shouldn't work though.
>
> ...ant
>
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 8:43 PM, Simon Nash <na...@apache.org> wrote:
> Simon Laws wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> 2008/6/4 ant elder <an...@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need
to
>>>> remove "incubating" at some point and as its not clear if the next
>>>
>>> release
>>>>
>>>> would be 2.0 or something else so i wondered if we should also remove
>>>> the
>>>> 2.0 giving a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT"? Any comments on that
or
>>>
>>> the
>>>>
>>>> timeframe for doing the change? I'd like to do it nowish so we have
some
>>>> time to discover any problems before the next release.
>>>>
>>>> ...ant
>>>>
>>> Hi ant,
>>> could you try a fresh build from svn?
>>> I've some problems with and I 'd go on with my work before we're
>>> arriving to 2.0.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ciao,
>>> Giorgio.
>>> ---
>>> "Venceremos adelante, o victoria o muerte!"
>>>
>>
>> I agree that it doesn't feel like the next release will be 2.0
>> I would prefer that we keep the trunk compatible with our 1.X level APIs
>> for
>> the time being as it feels like there is still a more 1.X releases to do
>> If people are going to start making breaking changes in a branch (we
>> discussed this under the 2.0 thread but it's not happening yet) then it
>> would be useful to me to have the trunk poms marked with 1.X SNAPSHOT so
>> that I know by looking on my disc what I'm working with
>> When (if?) the time comes down the line to break from our 1.X APIs we
>> could
>> then go to SNAPSHOT or 2.0 SNAPSHOT
>>
> I think it's useful to have some version number. "1.x" seems to clearly
> describe what we are currently developing in trunk, so my preference
> is for "1.x-SNAPSHOT".
>
> Simon
>
Lots of different views so far on this thread, better than no one replying
:) I'm tempted to go with "1.x-SNAPSHOT" as I think from whats been said
most would be ok with that, please say if you would _not_ be unhappy with
it. Note that all other projects I've looked at use either a specific
numeric number followed by the "-SNAPSHOT" suffix, or else just the string
"SNAPSHOT" for the trunk version, so having the letter "x" as part of our
version number makes for an "unusual" version name. Don't see why it
shouldn't work though.
...ant
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Simon Nash <na...@apache.org>.
Simon Laws wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> 2008/6/4 ant elder <an...@gmail.com>:
>>> Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need to
>>> remove "incubating" at some point and as its not clear if the next
>> release
>>> would be 2.0 or something else so i wondered if we should also remove the
>>> 2.0 giving a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT"? Any comments on that or
>> the
>>> timeframe for doing the change? I'd like to do it nowish so we have some
>>> time to discover any problems before the next release.
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>> Hi ant,
>> could you try a fresh build from svn?
>> I've some problems with and I 'd go on with my work before we're
>> arriving to 2.0.
>>
>>
>> Ciao,
>> Giorgio.
>> ---
>> "Venceremos adelante, o victoria o muerte!"
>>
>
> I agree that it doesn't feel like the next release will be 2.0
> I would prefer that we keep the trunk compatible with our 1.X level APIs for
> the time being as it feels like there is still a more 1.X releases to do
> If people are going to start making breaking changes in a branch (we
> discussed this under the 2.0 thread but it's not happening yet) then it
> would be useful to me to have the trunk poms marked with 1.X SNAPSHOT so
> that I know by looking on my disc what I'm working with
> When (if?) the time comes down the line to break from our 1.X APIs we could
> then go to SNAPSHOT or 2.0 SNAPSHOT
>
I think it's useful to have some version number. "1.x" seems to clearly
describe what we are currently developing in trunk, so my preference
is for "1.x-SNAPSHOT".
Simon
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
> 2008/6/4 ant elder <an...@gmail.com>:
> > Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need to
> > remove "incubating" at some point and as its not clear if the next
> release
> > would be 2.0 or something else so i wondered if we should also remove the
> > 2.0 giving a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT"? Any comments on that or
> the
> > timeframe for doing the change? I'd like to do it nowish so we have some
> > time to discover any problems before the next release.
> >
> > ...ant
> >
>
> Hi ant,
> could you try a fresh build from svn?
> I've some problems with and I 'd go on with my work before we're
> arriving to 2.0.
>
>
> Ciao,
> Giorgio.
> ---
> "Venceremos adelante, o victoria o muerte!"
>
I agree that it doesn't feel like the next release will be 2.0
I would prefer that we keep the trunk compatible with our 1.X level APIs for
the time being as it feels like there is still a more 1.X releases to do
If people are going to start making breaking changes in a branch (we
discussed this under the 2.0 thread but it's not happening yet) then it
would be useful to me to have the trunk poms marked with 1.X SNAPSHOT so
that I know by looking on my disc what I'm working with
When (if?) the time comes down the line to break from our 1.X APIs we could
then go to SNAPSHOT or 2.0 SNAPSHOT
Regards
Simon
Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to SNAPSHOT
Posted by Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@apache.org>.
2008/6/4 ant elder <an...@gmail.com>:
> Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need to
> remove "incubating" at some point and as its not clear if the next release
> would be 2.0 or something else so i wondered if we should also remove the
> 2.0 giving a trunk version of simply "SNAPSHOT"? Any comments on that or the
> timeframe for doing the change? I'd like to do it nowish so we have some
> time to discover any problems before the next release.
>
> ...ant
>
Hi ant,
could you try a fresh build from svn?
I've some problems with and I 'd go on with my work before we're
arriving to 2.0.
Ciao,
Giorgio.
---
"Venceremos adelante, o victoria o muerte!"