Oliver Lietz wrote > On Friday 08 January 2016 11:15:13 Chetan Mehrotra wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Daniel Klco <daniel.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> If this is a "beta" piece of software I'm not sure we'd need the >>> dependency >>> yet. >> >> Looks like my use of version as 0.0.2 caused confusion. To clarify >> this is not a "beta" piece of software. Current feature set done is >> stable, tested and the api not going to change in incompatible way. >> Its just that I plan to add some more features to this module before >> considering it as 1.0. I just treat 1.0 as special but its just me! >> >> Reason for current release is to allow use of the API part in other >> bundles and not hold that work. Further feature work would mostly >> affect reporting side which would not affect the bundles which make >> use of the API delivered so far >> >> If others think that we should call it v 1.0.0 for it to be included >> in bundle/commons and launchpad then I can as well cut a new release >> with 1.0 as version number? > > Chetan, big +1 for doing it that way. We have other bundles with versions > smaller 1.0 in Launchpad and I wish we would do it with other bundles also to > allow developers to test new features, e.g. validation. > But the difference here as that this is metrics api is intended final, hence the package version is 1.0.0. I think we either declare victory and have this released as 1.0.0 (both package and bundle version) or we agree that this might need a little bit of playing with it and potentially tweaking. In that case 0.0.2 for both versions would be good.
But releasing a 0.0.2 version with a final 1.0.0 package, doesn't sound right to me. Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler Adobe Research Switzerland cziege...@apache.org
