You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@htrace.apache.org by Stack <st...@duboce.net> on 2014/12/06 04:47:01 UTC
What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
org.htrace was at 3.0.4
The next release could be 4.0.0.
Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
Any opinions out there?
Thanks,
St.Ack
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>.
A majority of the projects i've been apart of in the incubator keep their
version the same and just increment to the next sem ver
-Jake
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 10:47 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> org.htrace was at 3.0.4
>
> The next release could be 4.0.0.
>
> Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
>
> Any opinions out there?
>
> Thanks,
> St.Ack
>
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu> wrote:
> I looked at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
> and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
>
> I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
> Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
> conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
> preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
Well said! Personally I have a slight preference towards 1.0.0 b/c
of the org.apache migration.
Thanks,
Roman.
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 11:48 PM, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu>
wrote:
> In general, though, I think that a 3.1.0 release would provide
> the same level of functionality as the 3.0.4, and maybe the next
> release is 4.0.0?
>
No need to hasten to 4.0. Let's see what features/improvements/changes we
want to get out and we can label releases accordingly.
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> What we did for Phoenix is make an initial ASF release that was the
> >> granted code with a package name search-and-replace and minor version
> >> increment. This let us focus on all the Apache packaging and release
> >> concerns like NOTICE file wording, RAT compliance, etc. and provided an
> >> opportunity for existing users to migrate to an ASF artifact at low
> risk -
> >> just package renames. Then we made a major version increment and put in
> >> some significant new features for that next release.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > I think we should do this.
> >
> > Lets stamp it 3.1.0-SNAPSHOT and do a release *tout de suite* that is
> > effectually the same as our 3.0.4 only it has new apache packaging and
> then
> > move forward from there.
> >
> > Letting above hang another few days in case more opinions otherwise will
> > move on the above
> > Thanks,
> > St.Ack
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> > On Dec 5, 2014, at 9:36 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I think going backwards to 1.0 would be confusing for any existing
> users.
> >> > Maybe make the -incubating releases pickup 3.1.x with the intention of
> >> the
> >> > first graduated release being 4.0.0. Could be seen as artificially
> >> > inflating the version numbers, but I don't think that matters too
> much. I
> >> > assume (prefer) we'll follow the guidelines of semantic versioning.
> >> >
> >> > -n
> >> >
> >> >> On Friday, December 5, 2014, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I looked at
> >> >>
> >>
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
> >> >> and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
> >> >> Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
> >> >> conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
> >> >> preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
> >> >>
> >> >> best,
> >> >> Colin
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net
> <javascript:;>>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>> org.htrace was at 3.0.4
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The next release could be 4.0.0.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Any opinions out there?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>> St.Ack
> >> >>
> >>
>
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu>.
Yeah. I like the idea of doing a release soon so that we can start
updating the consumers (such as HBase and HDFS) to import the new
org.apache. htrace stuff rather than the org.htrace stuff. It would
be nice to see a few minor interface improvements like HTRACE-1 and
HTRACE-2 in the new release as well. I think that would be easy to
do. In general, though, I think that a 3.1.0 release would provide
the same level of functionality as the 3.0.4, and maybe the next
release is 4.0.0?
cheers,
Colin
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> What we did for Phoenix is make an initial ASF release that was the
>> granted code with a package name search-and-replace and minor version
>> increment. This let us focus on all the Apache packaging and release
>> concerns like NOTICE file wording, RAT compliance, etc. and provided an
>> opportunity for existing users to migrate to an ASF artifact at low risk -
>> just package renames. Then we made a major version increment and put in
>> some significant new features for that next release.
>>
>>
>>
> I think we should do this.
>
> Lets stamp it 3.1.0-SNAPSHOT and do a release *tout de suite* that is
> effectually the same as our 3.0.4 only it has new apache packaging and then
> move forward from there.
>
> Letting above hang another few days in case more opinions otherwise will
> move on the above
> Thanks,
> St.Ack
>
>
>
>>
>> > On Dec 5, 2014, at 9:36 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I think going backwards to 1.0 would be confusing for any existing users.
>> > Maybe make the -incubating releases pickup 3.1.x with the intention of
>> the
>> > first graduated release being 4.0.0. Could be seen as artificially
>> > inflating the version numbers, but I don't think that matters too much. I
>> > assume (prefer) we'll follow the guidelines of semantic versioning.
>> >
>> > -n
>> >
>> >> On Friday, December 5, 2014, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I looked at
>> >>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
>> >> and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
>> >>
>> >> I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
>> >> Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
>> >> conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
>> >> preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
>> >>
>> >> best,
>> >> Colin
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> org.htrace was at 3.0.4
>> >>>
>> >>> The next release could be 4.0.0.
>> >>>
>> >>> Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
>> >>>
>> >>> Any opinions out there?
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> St.Ack
>> >>
>>
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Billie Rinaldi <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > What we did for Phoenix is make an initial ASF release that was the
> > granted code with a package name search-and-replace and minor version
> > increment. This let us focus on all the Apache packaging and release
> > concerns like NOTICE file wording, RAT compliance, etc. and provided an
> > opportunity for existing users to migrate to an ASF artifact at low risk
> -
> > just package renames. Then we made a major version increment and put in
> > some significant new features for that next release.
> >
> >
> >
> I think we should do this.
>
> Lets stamp it 3.1.0-SNAPSHOT and do a release *tout de suite* that is
> effectually the same as our 3.0.4 only it has new apache packaging and then
> move forward from there.
>
+1
>
> Letting above hang another few days in case more opinions otherwise will
> move on the above
> Thanks,
> St.Ack
>
>
>
> >
> > > On Dec 5, 2014, at 9:36 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think going backwards to 1.0 would be confusing for any existing
> users.
> > > Maybe make the -incubating releases pickup 3.1.x with the intention of
> > the
> > > first graduated release being 4.0.0. Could be seen as artificially
> > > inflating the version numbers, but I don't think that matters too
> much. I
> > > assume (prefer) we'll follow the guidelines of semantic versioning.
> > >
> > > -n
> > >
> > >> On Friday, December 5, 2014, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I looked at
> > >>
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
> > >> and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
> > >>
> > >> I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
> > >> Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
> > >> conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
> > >> preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
> > >>
> > >> best,
> > >> Colin
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net
> <javascript:;>>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> org.htrace was at 3.0.4
> > >>>
> > >>> The next release could be 4.0.0.
> > >>>
> > >>> Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
> > >>>
> > >>> Any opinions out there?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> St.Ack
> > >>
> >
>
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> What we did for Phoenix is make an initial ASF release that was the
> granted code with a package name search-and-replace and minor version
> increment. This let us focus on all the Apache packaging and release
> concerns like NOTICE file wording, RAT compliance, etc. and provided an
> opportunity for existing users to migrate to an ASF artifact at low risk -
> just package renames. Then we made a major version increment and put in
> some significant new features for that next release.
>
>
>
I think we should do this.
Lets stamp it 3.1.0-SNAPSHOT and do a release *tout de suite* that is
effectually the same as our 3.0.4 only it has new apache packaging and then
move forward from there.
Letting above hang another few days in case more opinions otherwise will
move on the above
Thanks,
St.Ack
>
> > On Dec 5, 2014, at 9:36 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I think going backwards to 1.0 would be confusing for any existing users.
> > Maybe make the -incubating releases pickup 3.1.x with the intention of
> the
> > first graduated release being 4.0.0. Could be seen as artificially
> > inflating the version numbers, but I don't think that matters too much. I
> > assume (prefer) we'll follow the guidelines of semantic versioning.
> >
> > -n
> >
> >> On Friday, December 5, 2014, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I looked at
> >>
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
> >> and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
> >>
> >> I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
> >> Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
> >> conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
> >> preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
> >>
> >> best,
> >> Colin
> >>
> >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
> >> wrote:
> >>> org.htrace was at 3.0.4
> >>>
> >>> The next release could be 4.0.0.
> >>>
> >>> Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
> >>>
> >>> Any opinions out there?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> St.Ack
> >>
>
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.
What we did for Phoenix is make an initial ASF release that was the granted code with a package name search-and-replace and minor version increment. This let us focus on all the Apache packaging and release concerns like NOTICE file wording, RAT compliance, etc. and provided an opportunity for existing users to migrate to an ASF artifact at low risk - just package renames. Then we made a major version increment and put in some significant new features for that next release.
> On Dec 5, 2014, at 9:36 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think going backwards to 1.0 would be confusing for any existing users.
> Maybe make the -incubating releases pickup 3.1.x with the intention of the
> first graduated release being 4.0.0. Could be seen as artificially
> inflating the version numbers, but I don't think that matters too much. I
> assume (prefer) we'll follow the guidelines of semantic versioning.
>
> -n
>
>> On Friday, December 5, 2014, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu> wrote:
>>
>> I looked at
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
>> and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
>>
>> I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
>> Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
>> conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
>> preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
>>
>> best,
>> Colin
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
>> wrote:
>>> org.htrace was at 3.0.4
>>>
>>> The next release could be 4.0.0.
>>>
>>> Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
>>>
>>> Any opinions out there?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> St.Ack
>>
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu>.
Makes sense to me. +1 for 3.1.0-SNAPSHOT
best,
Colin
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 11:56 PM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
> Most projects I have seen that changed their maven artifact org have
> continued from the old one (netty et al).
> +1 for using 3.1 for our first releases.
>
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 9:46 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Folks,
>> +0 on keeping versioning going >3.1.X or 3.2
>> I'll get more involved as the weeks go on.
>> Have a great weekend folks
>> Lewis
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I think going backwards to 1.0 would be confusing for any existing users.
>> > Maybe make the -incubating releases pickup 3.1.x with the intention of
>> the
>> > first graduated release being 4.0.0. Could be seen as artificially
>> > inflating the version numbers, but I don't think that matters too much. I
>> > assume (prefer) we'll follow the guidelines of semantic versioning.
>> >
>> > -n
>> >
>> > On Friday, December 5, 2014, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > I looked at
>> > >
>> >
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
>> > > and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
>> > >
>> > > I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
>> > > Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
>> > > conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
>> > > preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
>> > >
>> > > best,
>> > > Colin
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net
>> <javascript:;>>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > org.htrace was at 3.0.4
>> > > >
>> > > > The next release could be 4.0.0.
>> > > >
>> > > > Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
>> > > >
>> > > > Any opinions out there?
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > St.Ack
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Lewis*
>>
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>.
Most projects I have seen that changed their maven artifact org have
continued from the old one (netty et al).
+1 for using 3.1 for our first releases.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 9:46 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> +0 on keeping versioning going >3.1.X or 3.2
> I'll get more involved as the weeks go on.
> Have a great weekend folks
> Lewis
>
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think going backwards to 1.0 would be confusing for any existing users.
> > Maybe make the -incubating releases pickup 3.1.x with the intention of
> the
> > first graduated release being 4.0.0. Could be seen as artificially
> > inflating the version numbers, but I don't think that matters too much. I
> > assume (prefer) we'll follow the guidelines of semantic versioning.
> >
> > -n
> >
> > On Friday, December 5, 2014, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I looked at
> > >
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
> > > and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
> > >
> > > I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
> > > Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
> > > conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
> > > preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
> > >
> > > best,
> > > Colin
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net
> <javascript:;>>
> > > wrote:
> > > > org.htrace was at 3.0.4
> > > >
> > > > The next release could be 4.0.0.
> > > >
> > > > Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
> > > >
> > > > Any opinions out there?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > St.Ack
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Lewis*
>
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Lewis John Mcgibbney <le...@gmail.com>.
Hi Folks,
+0 on keeping versioning going >3.1.X or 3.2
I'll get more involved as the weeks go on.
Have a great weekend folks
Lewis
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think going backwards to 1.0 would be confusing for any existing users.
> Maybe make the -incubating releases pickup 3.1.x with the intention of the
> first graduated release being 4.0.0. Could be seen as artificially
> inflating the version numbers, but I don't think that matters too much. I
> assume (prefer) we'll follow the guidelines of semantic versioning.
>
> -n
>
> On Friday, December 5, 2014, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> > I looked at
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
> > and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
> >
> > I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
> > Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
> > conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
> > preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
> >
> > best,
> > Colin
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> > > org.htrace was at 3.0.4
> > >
> > > The next release could be 4.0.0.
> > >
> > > Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
> > >
> > > Any opinions out there?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > St.Ack
> >
>
--
*Lewis*
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com>.
I think going backwards to 1.0 would be confusing for any existing users.
Maybe make the -incubating releases pickup 3.1.x with the intention of the
first graduated release being 4.0.0. Could be seen as artificially
inflating the version numbers, but I don't think that matters too much. I
assume (prefer) we'll follow the guidelines of semantic versioning.
-n
On Friday, December 5, 2014, Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu> wrote:
> I looked at
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
> and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
>
> I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
> Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
> conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
> preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
>
> best,
> Colin
>
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> > org.htrace was at 3.0.4
> >
> > The next release could be 4.0.0.
> >
> > Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
> >
> > Any opinions out there?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > St.Ack
>
Re: What version should be the first apache htrace be? 4.0.0 or 1.0.0?
Posted by Colin McCabe <cm...@alumni.cmu.edu>.
I looked at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-versioning
and it doesn't say whether we need to start at 1. Hmm.
I think either way could work. There is stuff from org.htrace up on
Maven central, but since we're moving to org.apache.htrace, we won't
conflict if we choose to go back to 1.0.0. I don't really have any
preference between 1.0.0 or 4.0.0.
best,
Colin
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> org.htrace was at 3.0.4
>
> The next release could be 4.0.0.
>
> Or we could roll back and make it 1.0.0?
>
> Any opinions out there?
>
> Thanks,
> St.Ack