You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@freemarker.apache.org by Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> on 2016/12/27 16:47:26 UTC
Avoiding "-incubating" suffix in Maven version for non-org.apache Maven group?
I plan to send the below mail to general@incubator.apache.org. What do
you think?
Hello,
There's a project in Incubator called FreeMarker, with these Maven
coordinates:
<groupId>org.freemarker</groupId>
<artifactId>freemarker</artifactId>
<version>2.3.25-incubating</version>
It's org.freemarker because it was like that for a decade or so,
before attempting incubation. There's a plan for a non-BC line that
can switch to org.apache, but that's irrelevant now.
The "-incubating" in the Maven version is confusing for the users, as
it looks as the version number of an ustable release. For those not
working in the Java ecosystem, note that users will usually just grab
the latest version from the Maven Central Repo based on the version
string, without looking at the project home page, at least if it's
only a 3rd version number change. (See [*] if you care about some more
clues.)
So, as the groupId doesn't contain org.apache, is there any chance
that instead of putting "-incubating" into the Maven POM "version", we
change the Maven POM "name" from "Apache FreeMarker" to "Apache
FreeMarker (incubating)"? We would leave the version number as
2.x.x-incubating everywhere else, like in the file names of the
releases downloadable from apache.org, in the documentation, etc. I
believe this change would be beneficial for the users.
*: It certainly doesn't help that http://mvnrepository.com
automatically marks these incubating versions with red (~ alpha).
Anyway, on the same place 2.3.23, the last non-Apache release from
1.5 years ago, has suspiciously high usage compared to the two
"-incubating" releases following it. Spring has also stuck at
2.3.23, which is strange.
--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany
Re: Avoiding "-incubating" suffix in Maven version for non-org.apache Maven group?
Posted by Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu>.
Tuesday, December 27, 2016, 11:39:10 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 12:51 PM Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> wrote:
>> Basically yes. Though I will try to "exploit" that for doing at least
>> some non-BC API cleanups, and ideally much more.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by BC in either place where its used in this email thread.
Sorry. BC stands for Backward Compatible.
>> (note this email is purely from a IPMC member's perspective, don't take it
>> as verbatim)
>>
>> So I assume I should re-post this mail to incubator-general. Should I
>> still offer adding "(incubating)" to the "name" in the POM? My concern
>> there is that the project "name" was changed from "FreeMarker" to
>> "Apache FreeMarker", which I believe meant to be done for incubating
>> project. And so then in the POM we end up with "Apache <Something>"
>> without "incubating" anywhere around (as we remove that from the
>> "version"").
>
> That's up to you. The official ASF guide is here:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-artifacts.html
> It makes no reference to what should be in name, groupId or
> artifactId. There are customs and best practices, but no mandates on the content.
I see, thanks. I will ask permission for doing this, just to be
sure...
--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany
Re: Avoiding "-incubating" suffix in Maven version for non-org.apache
Maven group?
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 12:51 PM Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> wrote:
> Tuesday, December 27, 2016, 5:57:11 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
>
> > Daniel,
> >
> > Funny that you bring this up, its in alignment to the doc changes I've
> > proposed on the incubator list (if you could take a look). The incubator
> > policy on what the archive should be is here:
> > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
>
> Indeed, it doesn't require "-incubating" in the Maven version. So is
> your proposal about specifically stating that "-incubating" is not
> required in the Maven version?
>
>
My proposal is to state that -incubating was never a mandate in the maven
artifact. The only requirement the incubator has put forth is that the
release artifact (source tarball) contains -incubating in the name
somewhere (typically in a suffix) and has a DISCLAIMER indicating its
incubating status, from an ASF standpoint.
Users complain about what you're bringing up all the time, it makes
seemingly mature projects appear immature due to the maven coordinate when
in fact that was never the ask.
> > Specifically it requires that the *release archive* contains
> "-incubating"
> > not that the underlying artifacts contain "-incubating." So as far as I
> am
> > concerned, the individual maven/ant/gradle components that go into the
> > release do not need the suffix. Only the source tarball, and probably
> the
> > bin tarball.
> >
> > Changing the name, description, etc wouldn't be required. but I would
> > expect one of your graduation goals to be to move to org.apache as your
> > maven coordinates, even if they're duplicated by the old org.freemarker
> > coordinates.
>
> Basically yes. Though I will try to "exploit" that for doing at least
> some non-BC API cleanups, and ideally much more.
>
>
I'm not sure what you mean by BC in either place where its used in this
email thread.
> > (note this email is purely from a IPMC member's perspective, don't take
> it
> > as verbatim)
>
> So I assume I should re-post this mail to incubator-general. Should I
> still offer adding "(incubating)" to the "name" in the POM? My concern
> there is that the project "name" was changed from "FreeMarker" to
> "Apache FreeMarker", which I believe meant to be done for incubating
> project. And so then in the POM we end up with "Apache <Something>"
> without "incubating" anywhere around (as we remove that from the
> "version"").
>
That's up to you. The official ASF guide is here:
http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-artifacts.html
It makes no reference to what should be in name, groupId or artifactId.
There are customs and best practices, but no mandates on the content.
John
>
> > John
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 11:47 AM Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I plan to send the below mail to general@incubator.apache.org. What do
> >> you think?
> >>
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> There's a project in Incubator called FreeMarker, with these Maven
> >> coordinates:
> >>
> >> <groupId>org.freemarker</groupId>
> >> <artifactId>freemarker</artifactId>
> >> <version>2.3.25-incubating</version>
> >>
> >> It's org.freemarker because it was like that for a decade or so,
> >> before attempting incubation. There's a plan for a non-BC line that
> >> can switch to org.apache, but that's irrelevant now.
> >>
> >> The "-incubating" in the Maven version is confusing for the users, as
> >> it looks as the version number of an ustable release. For those not
> >> working in the Java ecosystem, note that users will usually just grab
> >> the latest version from the Maven Central Repo based on the version
> >> string, without looking at the project home page, at least if it's
> >> only a 3rd version number change. (See [*] if you care about some more
> >> clues.)
> >>
> >> So, as the groupId doesn't contain org.apache, is there any chance
> >> that instead of putting "-incubating" into the Maven POM "version", we
> >> change the Maven POM "name" from "Apache FreeMarker" to "Apache
> >> FreeMarker (incubating)"? We would leave the version number as
> >> 2.x.x-incubating everywhere else, like in the file names of the
> >> releases downloadable from apache.org, in the documentation, etc. I
> >> believe this change would be beneficial for the users.
> >>
> >> *: It certainly doesn't help that http://mvnrepository.com
> >> automatically marks these incubating versions with red (~ alpha).
> >> Anyway, on the same place 2.3.23, the last non-Apache release from
> >> 1.5 years ago, has suspiciously high usage compared to the two
> >> "-incubating" releases following it. Spring has also stuck at
> >> 2.3.23, which is strange.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thanks,
> >> Daniel Dekany
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Daniel Dekany
>
>
Re: Avoiding "-incubating" suffix in Maven version for non-org.apache Maven group?
Posted by Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu>.
Tuesday, December 27, 2016, 5:57:11 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> Daniel,
>
> Funny that you bring this up, its in alignment to the doc changes I've
> proposed on the incubator list (if you could take a look). The incubator
> policy on what the archive should be is here:
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
Indeed, it doesn't require "-incubating" in the Maven version. So is
your proposal about specifically stating that "-incubating" is not
required in the Maven version?
> Specifically it requires that the *release archive* contains "-incubating"
> not that the underlying artifacts contain "-incubating." So as far as I am
> concerned, the individual maven/ant/gradle components that go into the
> release do not need the suffix. Only the source tarball, and probably the
> bin tarball.
>
> Changing the name, description, etc wouldn't be required. but I would
> expect one of your graduation goals to be to move to org.apache as your
> maven coordinates, even if they're duplicated by the old org.freemarker
> coordinates.
Basically yes. Though I will try to "exploit" that for doing at least
some non-BC API cleanups, and ideally much more.
> (note this email is purely from a IPMC member's perspective, don't take it
> as verbatim)
So I assume I should re-post this mail to incubator-general. Should I
still offer adding "(incubating)" to the "name" in the POM? My concern
there is that the project "name" was changed from "FreeMarker" to
"Apache FreeMarker", which I believe meant to be done for incubating
project. And so then in the POM we end up with "Apache <Something>"
without "incubating" anywhere around (as we remove that from the
"version"").
> John
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 11:47 AM Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> wrote:
>
>> I plan to send the below mail to general@incubator.apache.org. What do
>> you think?
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> There's a project in Incubator called FreeMarker, with these Maven
>> coordinates:
>>
>> <groupId>org.freemarker</groupId>
>> <artifactId>freemarker</artifactId>
>> <version>2.3.25-incubating</version>
>>
>> It's org.freemarker because it was like that for a decade or so,
>> before attempting incubation. There's a plan for a non-BC line that
>> can switch to org.apache, but that's irrelevant now.
>>
>> The "-incubating" in the Maven version is confusing for the users, as
>> it looks as the version number of an ustable release. For those not
>> working in the Java ecosystem, note that users will usually just grab
>> the latest version from the Maven Central Repo based on the version
>> string, without looking at the project home page, at least if it's
>> only a 3rd version number change. (See [*] if you care about some more
>> clues.)
>>
>> So, as the groupId doesn't contain org.apache, is there any chance
>> that instead of putting "-incubating" into the Maven POM "version", we
>> change the Maven POM "name" from "Apache FreeMarker" to "Apache
>> FreeMarker (incubating)"? We would leave the version number as
>> 2.x.x-incubating everywhere else, like in the file names of the
>> releases downloadable from apache.org, in the documentation, etc. I
>> believe this change would be beneficial for the users.
>>
>> *: It certainly doesn't help that http://mvnrepository.com
>> automatically marks these incubating versions with red (~ alpha).
>> Anyway, on the same place 2.3.23, the last non-Apache release from
>> 1.5 years ago, has suspiciously high usage compared to the two
>> "-incubating" releases following it. Spring has also stuck at
>> 2.3.23, which is strange.
>>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Daniel Dekany
>>
>>
--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany
Re: Avoiding "-incubating" suffix in Maven version for non-org.apache
Maven group?
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
Daniel,
Funny that you bring this up, its in alignment to the doc changes I've
proposed on the incubator list (if you could take a look). The incubator
policy on what the archive should be is here:
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
Specifically it requires that the *release archive* contains "-incubating"
not that the underlying artifacts contain "-incubating." So as far as I am
concerned, the individual maven/ant/gradle components that go into the
release do not need the suffix. Only the source tarball, and probably the
bin tarball.
Changing the name, description, etc wouldn't be required. but I would
expect one of your graduation goals to be to move to org.apache as your
maven coordinates, even if they're duplicated by the old org.freemarker
coordinates.
(note this email is purely from a IPMC member's perspective, don't take it
as verbatim)
John
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 11:47 AM Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> wrote:
> I plan to send the below mail to general@incubator.apache.org. What do
> you think?
>
>
> Hello,
>
> There's a project in Incubator called FreeMarker, with these Maven
> coordinates:
>
> <groupId>org.freemarker</groupId>
> <artifactId>freemarker</artifactId>
> <version>2.3.25-incubating</version>
>
> It's org.freemarker because it was like that for a decade or so,
> before attempting incubation. There's a plan for a non-BC line that
> can switch to org.apache, but that's irrelevant now.
>
> The "-incubating" in the Maven version is confusing for the users, as
> it looks as the version number of an ustable release. For those not
> working in the Java ecosystem, note that users will usually just grab
> the latest version from the Maven Central Repo based on the version
> string, without looking at the project home page, at least if it's
> only a 3rd version number change. (See [*] if you care about some more
> clues.)
>
> So, as the groupId doesn't contain org.apache, is there any chance
> that instead of putting "-incubating" into the Maven POM "version", we
> change the Maven POM "name" from "Apache FreeMarker" to "Apache
> FreeMarker (incubating)"? We would leave the version number as
> 2.x.x-incubating everywhere else, like in the file names of the
> releases downloadable from apache.org, in the documentation, etc. I
> believe this change would be beneficial for the users.
>
> *: It certainly doesn't help that http://mvnrepository.com
> automatically marks these incubating versions with red (~ alpha).
> Anyway, on the same place 2.3.23, the last non-Apache release from
> 1.5 years ago, has suspiciously high usage compared to the two
> "-incubating" releases following it. Spring has also stuck at
> 2.3.23, which is strange.
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Daniel Dekany
>
>