Sounds good. Raymond Feng Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 2, 2012, at 8:13 AM, Antonio Sanso <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Raymond, > > in general I kind of agree with you. > The Core Oauth specification reached version 31 and should be the last one > before being an official RFC . > > IMHO we should aim to version 0.31 and try to align to spec and eventually > aim for a 1.0 release. Or alternatively we might aim directly to a 1.0 release > > WDYT? > > Antonio > > On Aug 2, 2012, at 5:07 PM, Raymond Feng wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I start to question if it's a good idea to use the oauth spec version as the >> base for Amber. There might be cases that make the scheme not so good: >> >> 1. What if there are little code changes between two spec versions >> 2. What if we need to fix certain things in Amber for a given spec version >> 3. What if we implement more specs, such as OpenId connect >> >> Btw, we can always document which spec level that an amber release >> implements. >> >> Thanks, >> Raymond >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Aug 2, 2012, at 1:49 AM, Antonio Sanso <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi *, >>> >>> after the release the current SNAPSHOT version in our poms is >>> >>> 0.23-incubating-SNAPSHOT >>> >>> According to our release semantic I was thinking to change it to be >>> 0.31-incubating-SNAPSHOT (as the version of the spec we are aiming for). >>> >>> WDYT? Should we still keep that naming convention until we will release the >>> 1.0 version or we can continue like this ? >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Antonio >
