You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomee.apache.org by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com> on 2011/10/01 01:03:45 UTC
TomEE version
Just remember a thought I had before going to bed last night....
Calling Apache TomEE a 4.0.0-beta-1 is a big mistake.
Should be Apache TomEE a 1.0.0-beta-1.
I think we're probably working against ourselves by not making it as new and exciting as possible. Some people might be confused "4.0? why haven't I heard of this before, it must suck" whereas no one will be confused by 1.0. Are we trying to launch and old and established and mature product or something new and exciting?
I now remember thinking just at that moment before falling asleep .. "well, you can always increase the version number later, but you can never decrease it." Seems like if we regret calling 4.x in the future, we'll never be able to fix it. At least with 1.x, we can still do what we want at a future date.
So in that vein I'm going to roll a version with the 1.0.0-beta-1 version. I have a fixed batch of binaries with the 4.0.0-beta-1 version number staged and ready to go:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenejb-016/
If we don't like the feel of 1.0.0-beta-1, we can release the above set of binaries and the tag.
-David
Re: TomEE version
Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
+1 as well but also agree with Romain, We can do that after the release.
Jlouis
Le 1 oct. 2011 09:05, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <rm...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> Does it mean we should refactor trunk after the release (i guess so)?
>
> - Romain
>
> Le 1 oct. 2011 01:13, "Karan Malhi" <ka...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> This is a great point David. Nice catch with the version number. This
>> is a brand new product and versioning should start with 1.0.
>> +1 for the version change.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:03 PM, David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>> Just remember a thought I had before going to bed last night....
>>>
>>> Calling Apache TomEE a 4.0.0-beta-1 is a big mistake.
>>>
>>> Should be Apache TomEE a 1.0.0-beta-1.
>>>
>>> I think we're probably working against ourselves by not making it as new
> and exciting as possible. Some people might be confused "4.0? why haven't
I
> heard of this before, it must suck" whereas no one will be confused by
1.0.
> Are we trying to launch and old and established and mature product or
> something new and exciting?
>>>
>>> I now remember thinking just at that moment before falling asleep ..
> "well, you can always increase the version number later, but you can never
> decrease it." Seems like if we regret calling 4.x in the future, we'll
> never be able to fix it. At least with 1.x, we can still do what we want
at
> a future date.
>>>
>>>
>>> So in that vein I'm going to roll a version with the 1.0.0-beta-1
> version. I have a fixed batch of binaries with the 4.0.0-beta-1 version
> number staged and ready to go:
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenejb-016/
>>>
>>> If we don't like the feel of 1.0.0-beta-1, we can release the above set
> of binaries and the tag.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Karan Singh Malhi
>> twitter.com/KaranSinghMalhi
Re: TomEE version
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Does it mean we should refactor trunk after the release (i guess so)?
- Romain
Le 1 oct. 2011 01:13, "Karan Malhi" <ka...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> This is a great point David. Nice catch with the version number. This
> is a brand new product and versioning should start with 1.0.
> +1 for the version change.
>
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:03 PM, David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> Just remember a thought I had before going to bed last night....
>>
>> Calling Apache TomEE a 4.0.0-beta-1 is a big mistake.
>>
>> Should be Apache TomEE a 1.0.0-beta-1.
>>
>> I think we're probably working against ourselves by not making it as new
and exciting as possible. Some people might be confused "4.0? why haven't I
heard of this before, it must suck" whereas no one will be confused by 1.0.
Are we trying to launch and old and established and mature product or
something new and exciting?
>>
>> I now remember thinking just at that moment before falling asleep ..
"well, you can always increase the version number later, but you can never
decrease it." Seems like if we regret calling 4.x in the future, we'll
never be able to fix it. At least with 1.x, we can still do what we want at
a future date.
>>
>>
>> So in that vein I'm going to roll a version with the 1.0.0-beta-1
version. I have a fixed batch of binaries with the 4.0.0-beta-1 version
number staged and ready to go:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenejb-016/
>>
>> If we don't like the feel of 1.0.0-beta-1, we can release the above set
of binaries and the tag.
>>
>>
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Karan Singh Malhi
> twitter.com/KaranSinghMalhi
Re: TomEE version
Posted by Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>.
This is a great point David. Nice catch with the version number. This
is a brand new product and versioning should start with 1.0.
+1 for the version change.
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:03 PM, David Blevins <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just remember a thought I had before going to bed last night....
>
> Calling Apache TomEE a 4.0.0-beta-1 is a big mistake.
>
> Should be Apache TomEE a 1.0.0-beta-1.
>
> I think we're probably working against ourselves by not making it as new and exciting as possible. Some people might be confused "4.0? why haven't I heard of this before, it must suck" whereas no one will be confused by 1.0. Are we trying to launch and old and established and mature product or something new and exciting?
>
> I now remember thinking just at that moment before falling asleep .. "well, you can always increase the version number later, but you can never decrease it." Seems like if we regret calling 4.x in the future, we'll never be able to fix it. At least with 1.x, we can still do what we want at a future date.
>
>
> So in that vein I'm going to roll a version with the 1.0.0-beta-1 version. I have a fixed batch of binaries with the 4.0.0-beta-1 version number staged and ready to go:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenejb-016/
>
> If we don't like the feel of 1.0.0-beta-1, we can release the above set of binaries and the tag.
>
>
>
> -David
>
>
--
Karan Singh Malhi
twitter.com/KaranSinghMalhi
Re: TomEE version
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl>.
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 1:03 AM, David Blevins <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Calling Apache TomEE a 4.0.0-beta-1 is a big mistake.
>
> Should be Apache TomEE a 1.0.0-beta-1.
I agree.
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
Java EE, functional languages and IBM WebSphere - http://blog.japila.pl
Warszawa JUG conference = Confitura (formerly Javarsovia) :: http://confitura.pl
"Hoping to save time by spending it" by David Blevins (Apache OpenEJB)