You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jackrabbit.apache.org by Angela Schreiber <an...@adobe.com> on 2014/05/27 14:08:46 UTC
Post Jackrabbit 2.8
hi
while resolving an issue that didn't make it into 2.8, i realized
that the version of the trunk is now set to 3.0-SNAPSHOT.
while i don't care too much about the number itself, it looks a bit
confusing to me, because some time ago we used to call jr3 what is now
oak. from my understanding we decided to not merge oak and jackrabbit.
if this was still true, i would find 2.x-SNAPSHOT more intuitive
than 3.0 which somehow implies that this is going to be another major
version of jackrabbit, which IMO is not very likely.
kind regards
angela
btw: is there a particular reason for not having a 2.8 branch? i was
looking for it as i wanted to merge some fixes.
Re: Post Jackrabbit 2.8
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Angela Schreiber <an...@adobe.com> wrote:
> makes sense to me... if you don't mind i would opt for keeping
> 3.0 reserved for that unified *rabbit and set the current
> version to 2.9-SNAPSHOT to avoid confusions and not putting
> too much pressure on us to complete the merge.
+1
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Re: Post Jackrabbit 2.8
Posted by Alexander Klimetschek <ak...@adobe.com>.
On 27.05.2014, at 06:54, Angela Schreiber <an...@adobe.com> wrote:
> makes sense to me... if you don't mind i would opt for keeping
> 3.0 reserved for that unified *rabbit and set the current
> version to 2.9-SNAPSHOT to avoid confusions and not putting
> too much pressure on us to complete the merge.
+1
To the outside, Oak = Jackrabbit 3.0, it would be hard to change that perception :)
Cheers,
Alex
Re: Post Jackrabbit 2.8
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Angela Schreiber <an...@adobe.com> wrote:
> makes sense to me... if you don't mind i would opt for keeping
> 3.0 reserved for that unified *rabbit and set the current
> version to 2.9-SNAPSHOT to avoid confusions and not putting
> too much pressure on us to complete the merge.
In revision 1614624 I switched trunk version from 3.0-SNAPSHOT to 2.9-SNAPSHOT.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Re: Post Jackrabbit 2.8
Posted by Angela Schreiber <an...@adobe.com>.
hi jukka
makes sense to me... if you don't mind i would opt for keeping
3.0 reserved for that unified *rabbit and set the current
version to 2.9-SNAPSHOT to avoid confusions and not putting
too much pressure on us to complete the merge.
kind regards
angela
On 27/05/14 15:19, "Jukka Zitting" <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 8:08 AM, Angela Schreiber <an...@adobe.com>
>wrote:
>> while resolving an issue that didn't make it into 2.8, i realized
>> that the version of the trunk is now set to 3.0-SNAPSHOT.
>>
>> while i don't care too much about the number itself, it looks a bit
>> confusing to me, because some time ago we used to call jr3 what is now
>> oak. from my understanding we decided to not merge oak and jackrabbit.
>> if this was still true, i would find 2.x-SNAPSHOT more intuitive
>> than 3.0 which somehow implies that this is going to be another major
>> version of jackrabbit, which IMO is not very likely.
>
>I'm still hoping that we'd bring Oak back into Jackrabbit for a
>unified Jackrabbit 3.0 (aka Blackrabbit) release. See
>http://markmail.org/message/u7dsue7ezb4cd4ox and
>http://markmail.org/message/yydr4ry7m3tmjinf. Thus the 3.0-SNAPSHOT
>version.
>
>But we could also set the version to 2.9-SNAPSHOT for now. Either way
>works for me.
>
>> btw: is there a particular reason for not having a 2.8 branch? i was
>> looking for it as i wanted to merge some fixes.
>
>No reason, so I just created the branch.
>
>BR,
>
>Jukka Zitting
Re: Post Jackrabbit 2.8
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 8:08 AM, Angela Schreiber <an...@adobe.com> wrote:
> while resolving an issue that didn't make it into 2.8, i realized
> that the version of the trunk is now set to 3.0-SNAPSHOT.
>
> while i don't care too much about the number itself, it looks a bit
> confusing to me, because some time ago we used to call jr3 what is now
> oak. from my understanding we decided to not merge oak and jackrabbit.
> if this was still true, i would find 2.x-SNAPSHOT more intuitive
> than 3.0 which somehow implies that this is going to be another major
> version of jackrabbit, which IMO is not very likely.
I'm still hoping that we'd bring Oak back into Jackrabbit for a
unified Jackrabbit 3.0 (aka Blackrabbit) release. See
http://markmail.org/message/u7dsue7ezb4cd4ox and
http://markmail.org/message/yydr4ry7m3tmjinf. Thus the 3.0-SNAPSHOT
version.
But we could also set the version to 2.9-SNAPSHOT for now. Either way
works for me.
> btw: is there a particular reason for not having a 2.8 branch? i was
> looking for it as i wanted to merge some fixes.
No reason, so I just created the branch.
BR,
Jukka Zitting