You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flink.apache.org by Robert Metzger <rm...@apache.org> on 2014/10/08 12:38:40 UTC
Minor change to the versioning scheme
Hi guys,
I noticed that we are doing the versioning of release a bit differently
than most other projects.
What we do differently is the numbering of major releases.
Let me explain ...
... our initial release are numbered like this:
0.5
0.6
0.7
Our bugfix releases are:
0.5.1
0.6.1
0.6.2 ..etc.
I suggest to call the initial major releases
0.7.0
0.8.0 and so on.
What is the advantage of this?
--> The names of our branches.
I would suggest to have a branch for each major-release-tree that is called
"release-0.x"
>From this branch, we create the initial release and all subsequent bugfix
releases.
It will be easier for users to understand how we name our branches if we
follow this approach, because all 3-digit branches are released versions,
2-digit branches are work in progress
I hope my little ascii-art-picture arrives properly at your side ;)
--------master------------------------------------------ <--- bugfixes and
features here.
\ \
\ release-0.7------ <--- 0.7 bugfixes
go here
\ \
\ release-0.7.1
--- release-0.6----------------------- <--0.6 bugfixes go
here
\ \
release-0.6.0 release-0.6.1 <--immutable
release tags.
If we all agree on this, I'll document it on the website.
Re: Minor change to the versioning scheme
Posted by Robert Metzger <rm...@apache.org>.
Seems like the picture is broken, here is a better version:
https://gist.github.com/rmetzger/284f23cc52331b893927
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Robert Metzger <rm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I noticed that we are doing the versioning of release a bit differently
> than most other projects.
> What we do differently is the numbering of major releases.
> Let me explain ...
> ... our initial release are numbered like this:
> 0.5
> 0.6
> 0.7
>
> Our bugfix releases are:
> 0.5.1
> 0.6.1
> 0.6.2 ..etc.
>
> I suggest to call the initial major releases
> 0.7.0
> 0.8.0 and so on.
>
>
> What is the advantage of this?
> --> The names of our branches.
> I would suggest to have a branch for each major-release-tree that is
> called "release-0.x"
> From this branch, we create the initial release and all subsequent bugfix
> releases.
>
> It will be easier for users to understand how we name our branches if we
> follow this approach, because all 3-digit branches are released versions,
> 2-digit branches are work in progress
>
>
> I hope my little ascii-art-picture arrives properly at your side ;)
>
> --------master------------------------------------------ <--- bugfixes and
> features here.
> \ \
> \ release-0.7------ <--- 0.7 bugfixes
> go here
> \ \
> \ release-0.7.1
> --- release-0.6----------------------- <--0.6 bugfixes
> go here
> \ \
> release-0.6.0 release-0.6.1 <--immutable
> release tags.
>
>
> If we all agree on this, I'll document it on the website.
>
>
>
Re: Minor change to the versioning scheme
Posted by Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>.
+1
Re: Minor change to the versioning scheme
Posted by Till Rohrmann <ti...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Ufuk Celebi <uc...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> On 08 Oct 2014, at 14:53, Kostas Tzoumas <kt...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds reasonable...
> >> Am 08.10.2014 12:43 schrieb "Fabian Hueske" <fh...@apache.org>:
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> 2014-10-08 12:38 GMT+02:00 Robert Metzger <rm...@apache.org>:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi guys,
> >>>>
> >>>> I noticed that we are doing the versioning of release a bit
> differently
> >>>> than most other projects.
> >>>> What we do differently is the numbering of major releases.
> >>>> Let me explain ...
> >>>> ... our initial release are numbered like this:
> >>>> 0.5
> >>>> 0.6
> >>>> 0.7
> >>>>
> >>>> Our bugfix releases are:
> >>>> 0.5.1
> >>>> 0.6.1
> >>>> 0.6.2 ..etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> I suggest to call the initial major releases
> >>>> 0.7.0
> >>>> 0.8.0 and so on.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> What is the advantage of this?
> >>>> --> The names of our branches.
> >>>> I would suggest to have a branch for each major-release-tree that is
> >>> called
> >>>> "release-0.x"
> >>>> From this branch, we create the initial release and all subsequent
> >> bugfix
> >>>> releases.
> >>>>
> >>>> It will be easier for users to understand how we name our branches if
> >> we
> >>>> follow this approach, because all 3-digit branches are released
> >> versions,
> >>>> 2-digit branches are work in progress
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I hope my little ascii-art-picture arrives properly at your side ;)
> >>>>
> >>>> --------master------------------------------------------ <--- bugfixes
> >>> and
> >>>> features here.
> >>>> \ \
> >>>> \ release-0.7------ <--- 0.7
> >> bugfixes
> >>>> go here
> >>>> \ \
> >>>> \ release-0.7.1
> >>>> --- release-0.6----------------------- <--0.6
> >> bugfixes
> >>> go
> >>>> here
> >>>> \ \
> >>>> release-0.6.0 release-0.6.1 <--immutable
> >>>> release tags.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> If we all agree on this, I'll document it on the website.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
Re: Minor change to the versioning scheme
Posted by Ufuk Celebi <uc...@apache.org>.
+1
On 08 Oct 2014, at 14:53, Kostas Tzoumas <kt...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Sounds reasonable...
>> Am 08.10.2014 12:43 schrieb "Fabian Hueske" <fh...@apache.org>:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> 2014-10-08 12:38 GMT+02:00 Robert Metzger <rm...@apache.org>:
>>>
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> I noticed that we are doing the versioning of release a bit differently
>>>> than most other projects.
>>>> What we do differently is the numbering of major releases.
>>>> Let me explain ...
>>>> ... our initial release are numbered like this:
>>>> 0.5
>>>> 0.6
>>>> 0.7
>>>>
>>>> Our bugfix releases are:
>>>> 0.5.1
>>>> 0.6.1
>>>> 0.6.2 ..etc.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest to call the initial major releases
>>>> 0.7.0
>>>> 0.8.0 and so on.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is the advantage of this?
>>>> --> The names of our branches.
>>>> I would suggest to have a branch for each major-release-tree that is
>>> called
>>>> "release-0.x"
>>>> From this branch, we create the initial release and all subsequent
>> bugfix
>>>> releases.
>>>>
>>>> It will be easier for users to understand how we name our branches if
>> we
>>>> follow this approach, because all 3-digit branches are released
>> versions,
>>>> 2-digit branches are work in progress
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I hope my little ascii-art-picture arrives properly at your side ;)
>>>>
>>>> --------master------------------------------------------ <--- bugfixes
>>> and
>>>> features here.
>>>> \ \
>>>> \ release-0.7------ <--- 0.7
>> bugfixes
>>>> go here
>>>> \ \
>>>> \ release-0.7.1
>>>> --- release-0.6----------------------- <--0.6
>> bugfixes
>>> go
>>>> here
>>>> \ \
>>>> release-0.6.0 release-0.6.1 <--immutable
>>>> release tags.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If we all agree on this, I'll document it on the website.
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: Minor change to the versioning scheme
Posted by Kostas Tzoumas <kt...@apache.org>.
+1
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sounds reasonable...
> Am 08.10.2014 12:43 schrieb "Fabian Hueske" <fh...@apache.org>:
>
> > +1
> >
> > 2014-10-08 12:38 GMT+02:00 Robert Metzger <rm...@apache.org>:
> >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > I noticed that we are doing the versioning of release a bit differently
> > > than most other projects.
> > > What we do differently is the numbering of major releases.
> > > Let me explain ...
> > > ... our initial release are numbered like this:
> > > 0.5
> > > 0.6
> > > 0.7
> > >
> > > Our bugfix releases are:
> > > 0.5.1
> > > 0.6.1
> > > 0.6.2 ..etc.
> > >
> > > I suggest to call the initial major releases
> > > 0.7.0
> > > 0.8.0 and so on.
> > >
> > >
> > > What is the advantage of this?
> > > --> The names of our branches.
> > > I would suggest to have a branch for each major-release-tree that is
> > called
> > > "release-0.x"
> > > From this branch, we create the initial release and all subsequent
> bugfix
> > > releases.
> > >
> > > It will be easier for users to understand how we name our branches if
> we
> > > follow this approach, because all 3-digit branches are released
> versions,
> > > 2-digit branches are work in progress
> > >
> > >
> > > I hope my little ascii-art-picture arrives properly at your side ;)
> > >
> > > --------master------------------------------------------ <--- bugfixes
> > and
> > > features here.
> > > \ \
> > > \ release-0.7------ <--- 0.7
> bugfixes
> > > go here
> > > \ \
> > > \ release-0.7.1
> > > --- release-0.6----------------------- <--0.6
> bugfixes
> > go
> > > here
> > > \ \
> > > release-0.6.0 release-0.6.1 <--immutable
> > > release tags.
> > >
> > >
> > > If we all agree on this, I'll document it on the website.
> > >
> >
>
Re: Minor change to the versioning scheme
Posted by Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>.
Sounds reasonable...
Am 08.10.2014 12:43 schrieb "Fabian Hueske" <fh...@apache.org>:
> +1
>
> 2014-10-08 12:38 GMT+02:00 Robert Metzger <rm...@apache.org>:
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I noticed that we are doing the versioning of release a bit differently
> > than most other projects.
> > What we do differently is the numbering of major releases.
> > Let me explain ...
> > ... our initial release are numbered like this:
> > 0.5
> > 0.6
> > 0.7
> >
> > Our bugfix releases are:
> > 0.5.1
> > 0.6.1
> > 0.6.2 ..etc.
> >
> > I suggest to call the initial major releases
> > 0.7.0
> > 0.8.0 and so on.
> >
> >
> > What is the advantage of this?
> > --> The names of our branches.
> > I would suggest to have a branch for each major-release-tree that is
> called
> > "release-0.x"
> > From this branch, we create the initial release and all subsequent bugfix
> > releases.
> >
> > It will be easier for users to understand how we name our branches if we
> > follow this approach, because all 3-digit branches are released versions,
> > 2-digit branches are work in progress
> >
> >
> > I hope my little ascii-art-picture arrives properly at your side ;)
> >
> > --------master------------------------------------------ <--- bugfixes
> and
> > features here.
> > \ \
> > \ release-0.7------ <--- 0.7 bugfixes
> > go here
> > \ \
> > \ release-0.7.1
> > --- release-0.6----------------------- <--0.6 bugfixes
> go
> > here
> > \ \
> > release-0.6.0 release-0.6.1 <--immutable
> > release tags.
> >
> >
> > If we all agree on this, I'll document it on the website.
> >
>
Re: Minor change to the versioning scheme
Posted by Fabian Hueske <fh...@apache.org>.
+1
2014-10-08 12:38 GMT+02:00 Robert Metzger <rm...@apache.org>:
> Hi guys,
>
> I noticed that we are doing the versioning of release a bit differently
> than most other projects.
> What we do differently is the numbering of major releases.
> Let me explain ...
> ... our initial release are numbered like this:
> 0.5
> 0.6
> 0.7
>
> Our bugfix releases are:
> 0.5.1
> 0.6.1
> 0.6.2 ..etc.
>
> I suggest to call the initial major releases
> 0.7.0
> 0.8.0 and so on.
>
>
> What is the advantage of this?
> --> The names of our branches.
> I would suggest to have a branch for each major-release-tree that is called
> "release-0.x"
> From this branch, we create the initial release and all subsequent bugfix
> releases.
>
> It will be easier for users to understand how we name our branches if we
> follow this approach, because all 3-digit branches are released versions,
> 2-digit branches are work in progress
>
>
> I hope my little ascii-art-picture arrives properly at your side ;)
>
> --------master------------------------------------------ <--- bugfixes and
> features here.
> \ \
> \ release-0.7------ <--- 0.7 bugfixes
> go here
> \ \
> \ release-0.7.1
> --- release-0.6----------------------- <--0.6 bugfixes go
> here
> \ \
> release-0.6.0 release-0.6.1 <--immutable
> release tags.
>
>
> If we all agree on this, I'll document it on the website.
>