if we move to v1 soon, we need an useful versioning strategy, better docs and examples + the api and spi need to be stable for some time (in the best case until v2+).
regards, gerhard 2013/11/11 Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > > > how should that work? > > Please note that we will have some not perfectly finished modules very > often. Basically whenever we add a new module... > There is just no way to avoid this other than making those modules own > releases. But this does not work out neither (as seen on a few other > projects I don't like to name). > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > > >________________________________ > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > >To: Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>; dev@deltaspike.apache.org > >Sent: Monday, 11 November 2013, 20:54 > >Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] next release version? 0.6 or 1.0? > > > > > > > >Well if code is released it should be stable or explicitely in > alpha/beta..maybe we should do subreleases for unstables modules > >Le 11 nov. 2013 18:43, "Mark Struberg" <strub...@yahoo.de> a écrit : > > > >Oki folks, txs 4 the feedback, all! > >> > >> > >>I'd say we should create the module-maturity-matrix.md first and then > we might do the version bump. > >>Maybe something like green/blue/orange/red for mature / ready but still > needs a few features / ready but might change it's api still / work in > progress > >> > >> > >>LieGrue, > >>strub > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>> From: Charles Moulliard <ch0...@gmail.com> > >>> To: dev@deltaspike.apache.org > >>> Cc: Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > >>> Sent: Monday, 11 November 2013, 18:25 > >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] next release version? 0.6 or 1.0? > >>> > >>> +1 to move to 1.0. We have done the same thing with Apache Aries moving > >>> Blueprint from 0.5 to 1.0 release > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 6:17 PM, John D. Ament > >>> <john.d.am...@gmail.com>wrote: > >>> > >>>> Yep, agreed. Users care about the version #. I would recommend > that if we > >>>> could release a 1.0 based on the current code base + some additional > bug > >>>> fixes we'll get huge wins. > >>>> > >>>> +1 to switching current to 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > Hi! > >>>> > > >>>> > In the last 2 months I did a few conference talks and smaller > >>>> > presentations (OpenBlend, W-JAX, ..) and always got the same > >>> questions: > >>>> > "it's only a 0.x version, so is it already stable? I > >>> don't like to use it > >>>> > in production with 0.x" > >>>> > > >>>> > And the actual answer is: "well, core, cdictrl, etc are stable > >>> since a > >>>> > long time, other modules are not yet 100% where we like them". > >>>> > > >>>> > The other fact is that we will never get all our modules 100% > stable. > >>>> > Because new modules cannot be released with the same quality than > >>>> > established and well known and bugfixed modules. > >>>> > > >>>> > Thus I think we should rather introduce a kind of majurity-matrix > for > >>>> > DeltaSpike. > >>>> > A simple list of modules and their majurity grade. > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > By officially moving to 1.0 we would gain much more users. > >>>> > I personally do not care about numbers, but LOTS of users do! > >>>> > > >>>> > Wdyt? > >>>> > > >>>> > LieGrue, > >>>> > strub > >>>> > > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Charles Moulliard > >>> Apache Committer / Architect @RedHat > >>> Twitter : @cmoulliard | Blog : http://cmoulliard.github.io > >>> > >> > > > > >
