You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ponymail.apache.org by Daniel Gruno <hu...@apache.org> on 2016/06/04 07:53:02 UTC
Versioning?
Hi folks,
As we are sooort of approaching the point where we should probably kick
a release out the door (the changelog is growing!), I got to think about
versioning.
Should we stick with the current scheme, and call the next version 0.9
(and then master would move to 0.10b), or should we adopt semantic
versioning, and call the next/first release 1.0.0 and have master be 1.1?
Thoughts? Comments? Ponytalk?
With regards,
Daniel.
Re: Versioning?
Posted by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>.
I am +1 for going with the 1.x for the first of the releases under the
umbrella of the ASF.
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
OFBiz based solutions & services
OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Daniel Gruno <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 06/04/2016 11:36 AM, Gav wrote:
>
>> Having 1.x(.x) anything implies that the product is stable. Is Ponymail
>> there yet?
>>
>
> Stable? yes, it's been that for a while.
> Feature complete and bug-free? no ;)
>
> I'd be okay with still using the 0.x for a while and then figure out when
> we want to hit 1.0. I just don't know how to do that with semantic
> versioning if that's the path we pick.
>
> With regards,
> Daniel.
>
>
>> Gav...
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>> ilgrosso@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Il 2016-06-04 09:53 Daniel Gruno ha scritto:
>>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>> As we are sooort of approaching the point where we should probably
>>>> kick a release out the door (the changelog is growing!), I got to
>>>> think about versioning.
>>>>
>>>> Should we stick with the current scheme, and call the next version 0.9
>>>> (and then master would move to 0.10b), or should we adopt semantic
>>>> versioning, and call the next/first release 1.0.0 and have master be
>>>> 1.1?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Semantic versioning + naming 1.0.0 (-incubating ?) the first official ASF
>>> version look good to me.
>>> Regards.
>>> --
>>> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>>>
>>> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
>>> http://www.tirasa.net/
>>>
>>> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
>>> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC,
>>> CXF Committer, OpenJPA Committer, PonyMail PPMC
>>> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Versioning?
Posted by Daniel Gruno <hu...@apache.org>.
On 06/04/2016 11:36 AM, Gav wrote:
> Having 1.x(.x) anything implies that the product is stable. Is Ponymail
> there yet?
Stable? yes, it's been that for a while.
Feature complete and bug-free? no ;)
I'd be okay with still using the 0.x for a while and then figure out
when we want to hit 1.0. I just don't know how to do that with semantic
versioning if that's the path we pick.
With regards,
Daniel.
>
> Gav...
>
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Francesco Chicchiricc� <il...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Il 2016-06-04 09:53 Daniel Gruno ha scritto:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>> As we are sooort of approaching the point where we should probably
>>> kick a release out the door (the changelog is growing!), I got to
>>> think about versioning.
>>>
>>> Should we stick with the current scheme, and call the next version 0.9
>>> (and then master would move to 0.10b), or should we adopt semantic
>>> versioning, and call the next/first release 1.0.0 and have master be
>>> 1.1?
>>>
>>
>> Semantic versioning + naming 1.0.0 (-incubating ?) the first official ASF
>> version look good to me.
>> Regards.
>> --
>> Francesco Chicchiricc�
>>
>> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
>> http://www.tirasa.net/
>>
>> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
>> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC,
>> CXF Committer, OpenJPA Committer, PonyMail PPMC
>> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
>>
>
>
>
Re: Versioning?
Posted by Gav <ip...@gmail.com>.
Having 1.x(.x) anything implies that the product is stable. Is Ponymail
there yet?
Gav...
On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Il 2016-06-04 09:53 Daniel Gruno ha scritto:
>
>> Hi folks,
>> As we are sooort of approaching the point where we should probably
>> kick a release out the door (the changelog is growing!), I got to
>> think about versioning.
>>
>> Should we stick with the current scheme, and call the next version 0.9
>> (and then master would move to 0.10b), or should we adopt semantic
>> versioning, and call the next/first release 1.0.0 and have master be
>> 1.1?
>>
>
> Semantic versioning + naming 1.0.0 (-incubating ?) the first official ASF
> version look good to me.
> Regards.
> --
> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>
> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
> http://www.tirasa.net/
>
> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC,
> CXF Committer, OpenJPA Committer, PonyMail PPMC
> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
>
--
Gav...
Re: Versioning?
Posted by Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>.
Il 2016-06-04 09:53 Daniel Gruno ha scritto:
> Hi folks,
> As we are sooort of approaching the point where we should probably
> kick a release out the door (the changelog is growing!), I got to
> think about versioning.
>
> Should we stick with the current scheme, and call the next version 0.9
> (and then master would move to 0.10b), or should we adopt semantic
> versioning, and call the next/first release 1.0.0 and have master be
> 1.1?
Semantic versioning + naming 1.0.0 (-incubating ?) the first official
ASF version look good to me.
Regards.
--
Francesco Chicchiriccò
Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
http://www.tirasa.net/
Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC,
CXF Committer, OpenJPA Committer, PonyMail PPMC
http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/