My 10 cents would be: just drop the suffix altogether. Let the patch just increment. I don't see a reason that we shouldn't just be 2.0.25. I have been using milestones in production for 7 years now...
That said, I think there are many other conventions out there (.FINAL hibernate, .RELEASE spring, .GA Liferay, ...) and you suggestion is as good as any On Aug 13, 2017 6:47 AM, "Stefan Seelmann" <[email protected]> wrote: > On 08/13/2017 10:04 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > > > when dealing with OSGi, we are likely to face some issue with teh > > version scheme we use : > > > > - maven makes it so 1.0.0 > 1.0.0-Mn and 1.0.0 > 1.0.0-RCn (we use M for > > milestone and RC for release candidates) > > > > - OSGI is purely incremental, and use a X.Y.Z.qualifier scheme, where > > the qualifier is compared using a String comparison. > > > > - OSGi does not accept '-' in between the version numbers (like > > 2.0.0-M1, it should be 2.0.0.M1) > > > > > > The issue with our scheme is that if we cut a release and call it 2.0.0, > > it will always be seen as inferior to any milstone of RC we created > > beforhand. > > My pragmatic answer: just use 2.0.1 for the first non-M and non-RC release. > > > I suggest we modify teh wy we name our versions in a way that is not > > intrusive : > > > > - release will not be plain numbers, like 2.0.0, but 2.0.0.GA > > > > - Milestone will be named AM (A does not stand for anything, it's just > > used to make sure it's lower than CR and GA) > > > > - Release Candidate CR (instead of RC). The rational is that AMn < CRn < > > GA, so 2.0.0.AM3 < 2.0.0.CR1 < 2.0.0.GA. It's a convention, and I know > > it's a hack... > > > > - Get rid of '-' and use a '.' instead. > > Fine for me if it helps. Howerver for ApacheDS 2.0.0 this is already too > late, because we alrady released 2.0.0.M24, right? > > Stefan >
