0.3 vs. trunk

[Chris Berry <ch...@gmail.com>]

Greetings,

Maybe I missed something along the way?
I have been using the SVN trunk to keep up with changes/bug fixes of  
late.
Sometimes encouraged to do so by this List.

At one point, a recent "svn up" required a large scale refactoring of  
my code
E.g.  CommonsClient is now AbderaClient, new packaging for /server, etc.
Note that the /trunk did NOT change its <version> from 0.3.0- 
incubating-SNAPSHOT

So today I grabbed the /branches/0.3-incubating, which frankly I just  
heard about this week.
Perhaps everyone else was aware of this branch? That is entirely  
possible.

And the branch: /branches/0.3-incubating does NOT contain the recent  
refactorings.
So now I am stuck in the middle.
I would love a "stable cut", but I really like the recent refactorings.
The new Spring stuff replaces a lot of code that I was providing.
And I know that /trunk will be the spot for active development.
And frankly, it took considerable effort to adapt my code to the  
refactorings

So, a few questions;
1) How stable is the current /trunk? I am going to Production soon  
with this code...
2) Can we change the /trunk <version> to 0.4.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT,  
so others do not make this same mistake?
3) Will a stable 0.4.0-incubating follow relatively soon??

Thanks much,
-- Chris


S'all good  ---   chriswberry at gmail dot com

Re: 0.3 vs. trunk

[Brian Moseley <bc...@osafoundation.org>]

On 9/14/07, James M Snell <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's no problem at all. Once we get the 0.3.0 release out, I'll bump up
> the version numbers in the trunk so we can avoid any further confusion.

why not go ahead and bump the version number on the trunk?

Re: 0.3 vs. trunk

[James M Snell <ja...@gmail.com>]

It's no problem at all. Once we get the 0.3.0 release out, I'll bump up
the version numbers in the trunk so we can avoid any further confusion.

- James

Chris Berry wrote:
> James,
> I apologize ! You are, of course, correct.
> It must have been pilot error on my part.
> I went back thru my steps of this AM, and now everything on my side
> builds fine against the branch;  0.3.0-incubating.
> (I have so many different versions around that I screwed up...)
> Sorry again about the spam.
> Thanks,
> -- Chris
> On Sep 14, 2007, at 9:46 AM, James M Snell wrote:
> 
>> As it stands right now, the only differences between 0.3.0 and the trunk
>> are the version numbers, the HttpResponse refactoring on the server, and
>> the new Conversion code.  The AbderaClient, most of the server
>> refactorings, the spring code, etc are all part of the 0.3.0 branch and
>> will ship in 0.3.0.
>>
>> - James
>>
>> Chris Berry wrote:
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> Maybe I missed something along the way?
>>> I have been using the SVN trunk to keep up with changes/bug fixes of
>>> late.
>>> Sometimes encouraged to do so by this List.
>>>
>>> At one point, a recent "svn up" required a large scale refactoring of my
>>> code
>>> E.g.  CommonsClient is now AbderaClient, new packaging for /server, etc.
>>> Note that the /trunk did NOT change its <version> from
>>> 0.3.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT
>>>
>>> So today I grabbed the /branches/0.3-incubating, which frankly I just
>>> heard about this week.
>>> Perhaps everyone else was aware of this branch? That is entirely
>>> possible.
>>>
>>> And the branch: /branches/0.3-incubating does NOT contain the recent
>>> refactorings.
>>> So now I am stuck in the middle.
>>> I would love a "stable cut", but I really like the recent refactorings.
>>> The new Spring stuff replaces a lot of code that I was providing.
>>> And I know that /trunk will be the spot for active development.
>>> And frankly, it took considerable effort to adapt my code to the
>>> refactorings
>>>
>>> So, a few questions;
>>> 1) How stable is the current /trunk? I am going to Production soon with
>>> this code...
>>> 2) Can we change the /trunk <version> to 0.4.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, so
>>> others do not make this same mistake?
>>> 3) Will a stable 0.4.0-incubating follow relatively soon??
>>>
>>> Thanks much,
>>> -- Chris
>>>
>>>
>>> S'all good  ---   chriswberry at gmail dot com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> S'all good  ---   chriswberry at gmail dot com
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: 0.3 vs. trunk

[Chris Berry <ch...@gmail.com>]

James,
I apologize ! You are, of course, correct.
It must have been pilot error on my part.
I went back thru my steps of this AM, and now everything on my side  
builds fine against the branch;  0.3.0-incubating.
(I have so many different versions around that I screwed up...)
Sorry again about the spam.
Thanks,
-- Chris 

On Sep 14, 2007, at 9:46 AM, James M Snell wrote:

> As it stands right now, the only differences between 0.3.0 and the  
> trunk
> are the version numbers, the HttpResponse refactoring on the  
> server, and
> the new Conversion code.  The AbderaClient, most of the server
> refactorings, the spring code, etc are all part of the 0.3.0 branch  
> and
> will ship in 0.3.0.
>
> - James
>
> Chris Berry wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> Maybe I missed something along the way?
>> I have been using the SVN trunk to keep up with changes/bug fixes  
>> of late.
>> Sometimes encouraged to do so by this List.
>>
>> At one point, a recent "svn up" required a large scale refactoring  
>> of my
>> code
>> E.g.  CommonsClient is now AbderaClient, new packaging for / 
>> server, etc.
>> Note that the /trunk did NOT change its <version> from
>> 0.3.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT
>>
>> So today I grabbed the /branches/0.3-incubating, which frankly I just
>> heard about this week.
>> Perhaps everyone else was aware of this branch? That is entirely  
>> possible.
>>
>> And the branch: /branches/0.3-incubating does NOT contain the recent
>> refactorings.
>> So now I am stuck in the middle.
>> I would love a "stable cut", but I really like the recent  
>> refactorings.
>> The new Spring stuff replaces a lot of code that I was providing.
>> And I know that /trunk will be the spot for active development.
>> And frankly, it took considerable effort to adapt my code to the
>> refactorings
>>
>> So, a few questions;
>> 1) How stable is the current /trunk? I am going to Production soon  
>> with
>> this code...
>> 2) Can we change the /trunk <version> to 0.4.0-incubating- 
>> SNAPSHOT, so
>> others do not make this same mistake?
>> 3) Will a stable 0.4.0-incubating follow relatively soon??
>>
>> Thanks much,
>> -- Chris
>>
>>
>> S'all good  ---   chriswberry at gmail dot com
>>
>>
>>
>>

S'all good  ---   chriswberry at gmail dot com

Re: 0.3 vs. trunk

[James M Snell <ja...@gmail.com>]

As it stands right now, the only differences between 0.3.0 and the trunk
are the version numbers, the HttpResponse refactoring on the server, and
the new Conversion code.  The AbderaClient, most of the server
refactorings, the spring code, etc are all part of the 0.3.0 branch and
will ship in 0.3.0.

- James

Chris Berry wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> Maybe I missed something along the way?
> I have been using the SVN trunk to keep up with changes/bug fixes of late.
> Sometimes encouraged to do so by this List.
> 
> At one point, a recent "svn up" required a large scale refactoring of my
> code
> E.g.  CommonsClient is now AbderaClient, new packaging for /server, etc.
> Note that the /trunk did NOT change its <version> from
> 0.3.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT
> 
> So today I grabbed the /branches/0.3-incubating, which frankly I just
> heard about this week.
> Perhaps everyone else was aware of this branch? That is entirely possible.
> 
> And the branch: /branches/0.3-incubating does NOT contain the recent
> refactorings.
> So now I am stuck in the middle.
> I would love a "stable cut", but I really like the recent refactorings.
> The new Spring stuff replaces a lot of code that I was providing.
> And I know that /trunk will be the spot for active development.
> And frankly, it took considerable effort to adapt my code to the
> refactorings
> 
> So, a few questions;
> 1) How stable is the current /trunk? I am going to Production soon with
> this code...
> 2) Can we change the /trunk <version> to 0.4.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, so
> others do not make this same mistake?
> 3) Will a stable 0.4.0-incubating follow relatively soon??
> 
> Thanks much,
> -- Chris
> 
> 
> S'all good  ---   chriswberry at gmail dot com
> 
> 
> 
>