[VOTE] Versioning proposal.

[Alan Conway <ac...@redhat.com>]

[ ] Vote to accept the following versioning proposal.

Gee, my first call for a vote :)

I have a proposal that I think satisfies Apache, Fedora (and RPM 
generally), the desire to show we're nearing release and the desire to 
avoid choosing version numbers at random.

Apache considers M numbers to be pre-release indicators, much like alpha 
or beta. So we can say qpid is version 1.0 pre-release M2, meaning we're 
approaching the real 1.0 release, and this is the second incubator 
pre-release.

RPM wants <name>-<version>-<release>, and non-numerics are allowed in 
the release field providing we give RPM a little help to figure out the 
order, so it would be:
  qpid-1.0-0.2.incubating-M2
Which means qpid version 1.0, second incubator pre-release (the extra 
0.2 is so RPM doesn't have to parse "incubating-M2")

When we get to the real 1.0 release the RPM becomes:
 qpid-1.0-1

Meaning: qpid 1.0 first real release. RPM will consider this newer than 
all the 1.0-0.blah incubator releases.

Cheers,
Alan.

Re: [VOTE] Versioning proposal.

[Robert Godfrey <ro...@gmail.com>]

I guess I should say something like

+ 1.0-0.0

Got to admit, deciding on version numbering schemes isn't one of those
things that gets me excited... the reasoning seems good to me (aiming for a
1.0 release) let's see if anyone has any objections...

-- Rob

On 07/03/07, Alan Conway <ac...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> [ ] Vote to accept the following versioning proposal.
>
> Gee, my first call for a vote :)
>
> I have a proposal that I think satisfies Apache, Fedora (and RPM
> generally), the desire to show we're nearing release and the desire to
> avoid choosing version numbers at random.
>
> Apache considers M numbers to be pre-release indicators, much like alpha
> or beta. So we can say qpid is version 1.0 pre-release M2, meaning we're
> approaching the real 1.0 release, and this is the second incubator
> pre-release.
>
> RPM wants <name>-<version>-<release>, and non-numerics are allowed in
> the release field providing we give RPM a little help to figure out the
> order, so it would be:
>   qpid-1.0-0.2.incubating-M2
> Which means qpid version 1.0, second incubator pre-release (the extra
> 0.2 is so RPM doesn't have to parse "incubating-M2")
>
> When we get to the real 1.0 release the RPM becomes:
> qpid-1.0-1
>
> Meaning: qpid 1.0 first real release. RPM will consider this newer than
> all the 1.0-0.blah incubator releases.
>
> Cheers,
> Alan.
>

Re: [VOTE] Versioning proposal.

[Rajith Attapattu <ra...@gmail.com>]

On 3/12/07, Alan Conway <ac...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> > same with me.
> > My original email about the whole thing was to make the RPM thingy
> > more easy
> > and also to make a more smooth transition to a 1.0 release.
> > I guess we probably have to wait till we graduate to shake off that
> > "incubating" part from the version name. (it looks ugly)
> >
> > I agree with Alans propsal until we graduate, and then we can do a
> > bunch of
> > 0.9x releases culminating in a 1.0 release.
> My proposal was to use 1.0-0.n.incubating-Mn for the nth incubator
> pre-release and 1.0-1 for our first "real" 1.0 out-of-incubator
> release.  Do you think we won't be ready for a 1.0 release at the point
> we leave the incubator?


Ok I got it.
I think atleast on the java side we are ready to do a real 1.0 release when
we graduate.
I am sure the others (c+++,python, ruby) will be ready too.

Rajith

Here's the proposal again:
> > I have a proposal that I think satisfies Apache, Fedora (and RPM
> > generally), the desire to show we're nearing release and the desire to
> > avoid choosing version numbers at random.
> >
> > Apache considers M numbers to be pre-release indicators, much like
> > alpha or beta. So we can say qpid is version 1.0 pre-release M2,
> > meaning we're approaching the real 1.0 release, and this is the second
> > incubator pre-release.
> >
> > RPM wants <name>-<version>-<release>, and non-numerics are allowed in
> > the release field providing we give RPM a little help to figure out
> > the order, so it would be:
> >  qpid-1.0-0.2.incubating-M2
> > Which means qpid version 1.0, second incubator pre-release (the extra
> > 0.2 is so RPM doesn't have to parse "incubating-M2")
> >
> > When we get to the real 1.0 release the RPM becomes:
> > qpid-1.0-1
> >
> > Meaning: qpid 1.0 first real release. RPM will consider this newer
> > than all the 1.0-0.blah incubator releases.
>
> Cheers,
> Alan.
>

Re: [VOTE] Versioning proposal.

[Alan Conway <ac...@redhat.com>]

Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> same with me.
> My original email about the whole thing was to make the RPM thingy 
> more easy
> and also to make a more smooth transition to a 1.0 release.
> I guess we probably have to wait till we graduate to shake off that
> "incubating" part from the version name. (it looks ugly)
>
> I agree with Alans propsal until we graduate, and then we can do a 
> bunch of
> 0.9x releases culminating in a 1.0 release.
My proposal was to use 1.0-0.n.incubating-Mn for the nth incubator 
pre-release and 1.0-1 for our first "real" 1.0 out-of-incubator 
release.  Do you think we won't be ready for a 1.0 release at the point 
we leave the incubator?

Here's the proposal again:
> I have a proposal that I think satisfies Apache, Fedora (and RPM 
> generally), the desire to show we're nearing release and the desire to 
> avoid choosing version numbers at random.
>
> Apache considers M numbers to be pre-release indicators, much like 
> alpha or beta. So we can say qpid is version 1.0 pre-release M2, 
> meaning we're approaching the real 1.0 release, and this is the second 
> incubator pre-release.
>
> RPM wants <name>-<version>-<release>, and non-numerics are allowed in 
> the release field providing we give RPM a little help to figure out 
> the order, so it would be:
>  qpid-1.0-0.2.incubating-M2
> Which means qpid version 1.0, second incubator pre-release (the extra 
> 0.2 is so RPM doesn't have to parse "incubating-M2")
>
> When we get to the real 1.0 release the RPM becomes:
> qpid-1.0-1
>
> Meaning: qpid 1.0 first real release. RPM will consider this newer 
> than all the 1.0-0.blah incubator releases.

Cheers,
Alan.

Re: [VOTE] Versioning proposal.

[Rajith Attapattu <ra...@gmail.com>]

same with me.
My original email about the whole thing was to make the RPM thingy more easy
and also to make a more smooth transition to a 1.0 release.
I guess we probably have to wait till we graduate to shake off that
"incubating" part from the version name. (it looks ugly)

I agree with Alans propsal until we graduate, and then we can do a bunch of
0.9x releases culminating in a 1.0 release.

Rajith

On 3/8/07, Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > [+1] Vote to accept the following versioning proposal.
>
> fine by me
>

Re: [VOTE] Versioning proposal.

[Alan Conway <ac...@redhat.com>]

Rupert Smith wrote:
> [+1] So in maven its, 1.0-0.2.incubating-M2-SNAPSHOT (now thats a
> catchy version number!)

Maven can just use 1.0.incubating-M2. The extra -0.2 is a redundant 
repetition of the 2 from M2 to help RPM get version comparisons right, 
we don't have to inflict it everywhere.

Cheers,
Alan.

Re: [VOTE] Versioning proposal.

[Rupert Smith <ru...@googlemail.com>]

[+1] So in maven its, 1.0-0.2.incubating-M2-SNAPSHOT (now thats a
catchy version number!)

On 3/8/07, Martin Ritchie <ri...@apache.org> wrote:
>  [+1] Vote to accept the following versioning proposal.
>
> --
> Martin Ritchie
>

Re: [VOTE] Versioning proposal.

[Martin Ritchie <ri...@apache.org>]

 [+1] Vote to accept the following versioning proposal.

-- 
Martin Ritchie

Re: [VOTE] Versioning proposal.

[Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com>]

> [+1] Vote to accept the following versioning proposal.

fine by me