You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by "Farr, Aaron" <Aa...@am.sony.com> on 2004/03/13 14:34:38 UTC
more on versions
Hello,
I've been working on updating a Fortress app of mine to take advantage of
avalon-repository. However, I've noticed that the DefaultInitialContext
constructor has changed and the simpler constructors are now part of a
DefaultInitialContextFactory. So a couple of things:
The javadocs on the avalon-repository site say "1.3" at the top, but this
cannot be accurate. Or at least they aren't the latest 1.3 javadocs. I
imagine they are probably closer to 1.2, but I'm not sure. This makes it
harder to write my application. So, mini-proposal #1:
* javadocs should be published for only the latest STABLE release unless
otherwise noted in the link description
Secondly, according to the APR versioning scheme [1] which we discussed
before [2] and got a general consensus to adopt, these changes qualify as a
MAJOR version number change because software written against 1.2 will not
compile against the current 1.3 snapshots. This means 1.3 _should_ be a 2.0
release. This brings me to mini-proposal #2:
* we need to official adopt a versioning scheme and begin enforcing it
I think the APR rules make sense. We can work on a way to automate it or
whatever, I don't care. We just need consistency.
Thoughts?
I'll bring the versioning scheme up as an official vote if necessary.
J. Aaron Farr
SONY ELECTRONICS
DDP-CIM
(724) 696-7653
[1] http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html
[2] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=107730780100003&r=1&w=2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: more on versions
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Ummm - last release of avalon-repository was 1.2.
Current CVS HEAD is 2.0-SNAPSHOT.
Re. docs on site - yep this is a general problem - but its a problem I
think we need to deal with by providing versioned site information. E.g.
repository/1.2/
repository/2.0/
Then symlink repository/latest to the lastest release version of the docs.
Steve.
Farr, Aaron wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've been working on updating a Fortress app of mine to take advantage of
> avalon-repository. However, I've noticed that the DefaultInitialContext
> constructor has changed and the simpler constructors are now part of a
> DefaultInitialContextFactory. So a couple of things:
>
> The javadocs on the avalon-repository site say "1.3" at the top, but this
> cannot be accurate. Or at least they aren't the latest 1.3 javadocs. I
> imagine they are probably closer to 1.2, but I'm not sure. This makes it
> harder to write my application. So, mini-proposal #1:
>
> * javadocs should be published for only the latest STABLE release unless
> otherwise noted in the link description
>
> Secondly, according to the APR versioning scheme [1] which we discussed
> before [2] and got a general consensus to adopt, these changes qualify as a
> MAJOR version number change because software written against 1.2 will not
> compile against the current 1.3 snapshots. This means 1.3 _should_ be a 2.0
> release. This brings me to mini-proposal #2:
>
> * we need to official adopt a versioning scheme and begin enforcing it
>
> I think the APR rules make sense. We can work on a way to automate it or
> whatever, I don't care. We just need consistency.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> I'll bring the versioning scheme up as an official vote if necessary.
>
> J. Aaron Farr
> SONY ELECTRONICS
> DDP-CIM
> (724) 696-7653
>
> [1] http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html
> [2] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=107730780100003&r=1&w=2
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
>
>
--
|------------------------------------------------|
| Magic by Merlin |
| Production by Avalon |
| |
| http://avalon.apache.org/merlin |
| http://dpml.net/merlin/distributions/latest |
|------------------------------------------------|
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: more on versions
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Saturday 13 March 2004 21:34, Farr, Aaron wrote:
> * javadocs should be published for only the latest STABLE release unless
> otherwise noted in the link description
This is a big management issue, and as Stephen suggests I also think that ALL
DOCS require to be hard versioned on the website, and that the default
symlinks to the latest released version, but all older versions should also
be available.
I suggest that we put in place a system, where documentation is tagged at
every release with the Version ( ex, V1_3 ), and if it needs update, it is
branched and updated in the CVS branch.
That means that HEAD is always ahead of the release, just like code, and can
be managed from source point of view.
And when generating the site, we need to pull out the properly tagged version
(NOT HEAD) and generate into a directory of that version, and then do the
symlink.
Complicated, yes, somewhat... These are the kind of stuff that Maven should
help us with.
> * we need to official adopt a versioning scheme and begin enforcing it
> I think the APR rules make sense. We can work on a way to automate it or
> whatever, I don't care. We just need consistency.
I agree 148.3% !!!
APR have probably nailed this down (I dare to say without checking), so let's
not re-invent the wheel.
Niclas
--
+---------//-------------------+
| http://www.bali.ac |
| http://niclas.hedhman.org |
+------//----------------------+
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org