The current format of the Artemis version on master (1.2.1-SNAPSHOT) is fine. The only issue with it as a version would be if you dont actually release 1.2.1, as then the snapshots wont get cleaned up automatically. Given that the point releases didnt occur for 1.0.1 or 1.1.1 the obvious change would be to make master 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT now, then 1.4.0-SNAPSHOT, etc etc. You can always still release a 1.X.1 straight from master regardless if desired (or make a branch).
The problem with the other old artifacts was that the modules were renamed, from activemq-foo to artemis-foo, and reversioned from 6.0.0 to 1.0.0, so those old snapshots never got cleaned up as nothing matching them ever appeared to be released. Robbie On 20 January 2016 at 14:48, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > Will that look ok? > > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/330 > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Clebert Suconic > <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: >> We can do the same on Artemis.... >> >> So it will be better to make the changes before cleaning up the repo then. >> >> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Christopher Shannon >> <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> +1 for the version change...I've always used X.X.0-SNAPSHOT and not >>> X.X-SNAPSHOT for development versions so this makes sense to me. >>> >>> I can change the current 5.14-SNAPSHOT to 5.14.0-SNAPSHOT if no one has any >>> complaints. >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 01/19/2016 04:34 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote: >>>> > On 18 January 2016 at 18:46, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> On 18 January 2016 at 15:53, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> We seem to have a bit of a mess in our snapshots area with lots of old >>>> >>> snapshots for ancient releases like 5.3, 5.4, etc along with snapshots >>>> >>> for an ActiveMQ 6.0.0 release that has caused some confusion recently. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Some examples of old snapshots or snapshot to things that were never >>>> >>> released. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/activemq/activemq-aerogear-integration/ >>>> >>> >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/activemq/activemq-all/ >>>> >>> >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/activemq/activemq-book/ >>>> >>> >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/activemq/activemq-bootstrap/ >>>> >>> >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/activemq/activemq-core-client/ >>>> >>> >>>> >>> We can request that infra wipe out the snapshots area and let the >>>> >>> jenkins runs repopulate with only the current builds for active project >>>> >>> work. Alternatively we can go through every folder and audit them but >>>> >>> given they are snapshots it's simpler just to blow them all away. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Thoughts? >>>> >>> >>>> >>> -- >>>> >>> Tim Bish >>>> >>> twitter: @tabish121 >>>> >>> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >> Cleaning things up would definitely be good. Given the sizable amount >>>> >> of cruft I dont think it makes sense to try pruning them individually, >>>> >> and I'm not sure infra would be particularly happy at being asked that >>>> >> either hehe, so the full wipe seems like the way to go to me. >>>> >> >>>> >> Robbie >>>> > >>>> > To add to that... >>>> > >>>> > Old snapshots normally get cleaned up once a release occurs but this >>>> > isn't happening for the ActiveMQ 5.X bits, which is why all those old >>>> > bits are still there. The reason is likely that the snapshot versions >>>> > dont align with the end release version used, as the snapshots are >>>> > using 5.X-SNAPSHOT but the released bits then actually use 5.X.0, and >>>> > so the cleanup process isn't able to recognise that the snapshots have >>>> > become stale artifacts following a release. >>>> > >>>> > We should probably also change to using 5.X.0-SNAPSHOT on master >>>> > (before asking infra to nuke the snapshot repo) to prevent more cruft >>>> > accumulating again with each future release. >>>> > >>>> > Robbie >>>> > >>>> Exactly. Hadn't gotten around to typing that up yet, thanks for saving >>>> me some work Robbie :) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Tim Bish >>>> twitter: @tabish121 >>>> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Clebert Suconic > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic
