On 28 April 2013 18:27, Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is less attention paid to the API for an alpha/beta? > > If the idea is to be able to change the API (possibly breaking compatibility) then I don't think a Beta release is appropriate.
That would be for an Alpha release - and we would have to make very clear that a subquent release might break compatibility. I think that's about the only situation where Commons might release a binary-incompatible jar without changing Maven coords or package name. I think a Beta release is more suitable for indicating that there may be quite a few bugs in the code, so users should only upgrade if they are prepared for this. In any case any release needs to go through the usual release vote process. Hen > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Jochen Wiedmann < > jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > There is nothing special. Even with "alpha", or "beta" as part of the > > version number, it is technically an ASF release, and therefore subject > to > > the full blown process and rules. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Thomas Neidhart > > <thomas.neidh...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I have seen that the log4j team prepared a new beta for v2. > > > > > > As collections 4 is very close to be ready, I'd like to know more about > > > the process of beta releases, as I am planning to do the same for > > > collections 4. > > > > > > Can somebody enlighten me a bit? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Thomas > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > "That's what prayers are ... it's frightened people trying to make > friends > > with the bully!" > > > > Terry Pratchett. The Last Hero > > >
