Tuesday, December 27, 2016, 5:57:11 PM, John D. Ament wrote:

> Daniel,
>
> Funny that you bring this up, its in alignment to the doc changes I've
> proposed on the incubator list (if you could take a look).  The incubator
> policy on what the archive should be is here:
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases

Indeed, it doesn't require "-incubating" in the Maven version. So is
your proposal about specifically stating that "-incubating" is not
required in the Maven version?

> Specifically it requires that the *release archive* contains "-incubating"
> not that the underlying artifacts contain "-incubating."  So as far as I am
> concerned, the individual maven/ant/gradle components that go into the
> release do not need the suffix.  Only the source tarball, and probably the
> bin tarball.
>
> Changing the name, description, etc wouldn't be required.  but I would
> expect one of your graduation goals to be to move to org.apache as your
> maven coordinates, even if they're duplicated by the old org.freemarker
> coordinates.

Basically yes. Though I will try to "exploit" that for doing at least
some non-BC API cleanups, and ideally much more.

> (note this email is purely from a IPMC member's perspective, don't take it
> as verbatim)

So I assume I should re-post this mail to incubator-general. Should I
still offer adding "(incubating)" to the "name" in the POM? My concern
there is that the project "name" was changed from "FreeMarker" to
"Apache FreeMarker", which I believe meant to be done for incubating
project. And so then in the POM we end up with "Apache <Something>"
without "incubating" anywhere around (as we remove that from the
"version"").

> John
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 11:47 AM Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I plan to send the below mail to [email protected]. What do
>> you think?
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> There's a project in Incubator called FreeMarker, with these Maven
>> coordinates:
>>
>>     <groupId>org.freemarker</groupId>
>>     <artifactId>freemarker</artifactId>
>>     <version>2.3.25-incubating</version>
>>
>> It's org.freemarker because it was like that for a decade or so,
>> before attempting incubation. There's a plan for a non-BC line that
>> can switch to org.apache, but that's irrelevant now.
>>
>> The "-incubating" in the Maven version is confusing for the users, as
>> it looks as the version number of an ustable release. For those not
>> working in the Java ecosystem, note that users will usually just grab
>> the latest version from the Maven Central Repo based on the version
>> string, without looking at the project home page, at least if it's
>> only a 3rd version number change. (See [*] if you care about some more
>> clues.)
>>
>> So, as the groupId doesn't contain org.apache, is there any chance
>> that instead of putting "-incubating" into the Maven POM "version", we
>> change the Maven POM "name" from "Apache FreeMarker" to "Apache
>> FreeMarker (incubating)"? We would leave the version number as
>> 2.x.x-incubating everywhere else, like in the file names of the
>> releases downloadable from apache.org, in the documentation, etc. I
>> believe this change would be beneficial for the users.
>>
>> *: It certainly doesn't help that http://mvnrepository.com
>>    automatically marks these incubating versions with red (~ alpha).
>>    Anyway, on the same place 2.3.23, the last non-Apache release from
>>    1.5 years ago, has suspiciously high usage compared to the two
>>    "-incubating" releases following it. Spring has also stuck at
>>    2.3.23, which is strange.
>>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>>  Daniel Dekany
>>
>>

-- 
Thanks,
 Daniel Dekany

Reply via email to