Thx. I now understand the rational behing this scheme :-) On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 10:41, Felix Meschberger <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > Guillaume Nodet schrieb: > > I've tried to release gogo this morning and after fixing a few things, > i've > > badly hit FELIX-1262 which is actually fixed in the latest snapshot of > the > > maven bundle plugin. > > Is this plugin in a state to be released now ? > > I can try to release it unless somebody is willing to do it. What would > be > > the version to use ? 2.0.1, 2.0.2 ? Not sure to have a good > understanding > > of the version scheme with odd/even numbers for minor releases. > > AFAICT the odd/even numbers scheme only applies to bundles not to maven > plugins. And we apply that scheme to minor and micro version numbers. > The reason for this is that OSGi thinks 1.2.3.SNAPSHOT is more recent > (and thus preferrable) than 1.2.3. > > Regards > Felix > > > > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 08:25, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I'd like to release a first version of Gogo. > >> However, given the RFC is bound to change and that we might introduce > >> other changes that will break the syntax, I wonder if we should use a > >> 0.2.0 version instead of 1.0.0. > >> In addition, we will release the org.osgi.service.command package > >> which is not official, so I think keeping a version < 1.0.0 makes > >> sense until a spec is released for that. > >> Thoughts ? > >> > >> -- > >> Cheers, > >> Guillaume Nodet > >> ------------------------ > >> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ > >> ------------------------ > >> Open Source SOA > >> http://fusesource.com > >> > > > > > > > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
