Suggestion
To get rid of the number trouble, you can put stable or unstable or
alpha, beta behind it.
e.g. 2.0.0-stable, 2.0.0-unstable, 2.0.0-alpha,beta etc (Don't know
exactly what the standards for the Apache community are)
Of course only numbers would be nice, but then probably the
standardization issues are not that clear as when putting stable_unstable.
Congrats with the TLP!
All the best
Martin
Trustin Lee wrote:
MINA community also need to think about this issue.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Trustin Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Oct 28, 2006 9:55 PM
Subject: Versioning scheme
To: Apache Directory Developers List <[email protected]>
Hi all,
For now we are using an even/odd versioining scheme with three
components (
major.minor.micro) An even minor version means stable, and an odd minor
version means unstable. I think this even/odd separation is a great
idea,
but it puts us in a big trouble when we bump up tje major version number.
MINA is a good example. MINA is going to move to Java 5, and thus its
major
version number should be 2 ( i.e. 2.0.0), but we can't go to 2.0
because the
minor version number 0 means 'stable'. So we are talking about using the
version number 1.5 or 1.9, but I think it's very weird because we've
changed
our platform.
Is there any good idea to solve this problem? My current idea is to
switch
the meaning of even and odd numbers ( i.e. Even = unstable, Odd =
stable).
I think this is more natural because 2.0 can't be stable. Most people
thinks 2.1 is much more stablized version. But there might be different
cultural background among Asians and Americans/Europeans, so I'm not
sure if
this idea will work fine for everyone.
WDYT?
Trustin
