+1 On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Kirk Lund <[email protected]> wrote:
> I prefer the Spring model on release numbering/labeling. Also since I'm one > of the folks who has to work on both projects, I really want this to be > consistent between Apache Geode (incubating) and Spring Data GemFire. > > -Kirk > > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Swapnil Bawaskar <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Also, I don’t see a need to do M? or RC? releases before this initial > > release. > > > > I think we could have called this release M1 (our first milestone of > > removing olg jgroups and cleanup) rather than alpha1. But it probably is > > too late to change that now. > > > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 10:48 AM, John Blum <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > For clarification, the "RELEASE" version qualifier is only used for the > > > final GA (production-grade release), not any other version. So, by way > > of > > > example, (using Spring Data GemFire > > > <https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-data-gemfire/releases> [0]) > > the > > > release series will progress as follows... > > > > > > 1.7.0.M1 > > > 1.7.0.RC1 > > > 1.7.0.RELEASE > > > 1.7.1.RELEASE > > > 1.7.2.RELEASE > > > 1.8.0.M1 > > > 1.8.0.RC1 > > > 1.8.0.RELEASE > > > > > > There can be any number of milestone and release candidates in between. > > > > > > With Spring, rather than having alpha, beta, etc type releases, we just > > use > > > milestones (which implies things are changing... feature additions, > > > enhancements, bug fixes, etc) while release candidates indicate > hardening > > > of the release version (mainly bug fixes, perhaps minor enhancements > that > > > won't destabalize the build) and final RELEASE of course, indicates, it > > is > > > ready for production. > > > > > > Hope this helps. > > > > > > -John > > > > > > [0] - https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-data-gemfire/releases > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Anthony Baker <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > As a starting point for discussion, I’ve set the version on the > > > > release/1.0.0-incubating-alpha1 branch to: > > > > > > > > 1.0.0-incubating-alpha1 > > > > > > > > Is there a preference to follow the Spring convention as John is > > > > suggesting? Are there many / any ASF projects following that > > > convention?. > > > > Here’ s what that version string would look like: > > > > > > > > 1.0.0-incubating-alpha1.RELEASE > > > > > > > > > > > > I do think we should remove the -SNAPSHOT from the version on the > > release > > > > branch so that we can validate the exact bits that we will publish. > > > Also, > > > > I don’t see a need to do M? or RC? releases before this initial > > release. > > > > IMHO of course... > > > > > > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2016, at 9:44 AM, John Blum <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In Spring, the releaseType (qualifier) is always (BUILD-)SNAPSHOT > > > unless > > > > it > > > > > is a release (M1, M2, ..., RC1, ... RELEASE (GA)). > > > > > > > > > > When a particular version ends, for instance when 1.0.0.RELASE goes > > GA, > > > > the > > > > > version/releaseType switches to 1.1.0.(BUILD-)SNAPSHOT and a 1.0.x > > > branch > > > > > is created to "service" the old version (with subsequent releases > > being > > > > > 1.0.1.RELEASE, 1.0.2.RELEASE, etc; the 1.0.x development branch > will > > > have > > > > > then have subsequent versions of 1.0.3.(BUILD-)SNAPSHOT), but > remain > > > > with a > > > > > releaseType of (BUILD-)SNAPSHOT). > > > > > > > > > > Make sense? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 8:26 AM, William Markito < > [email protected] > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> I think we can keep it snapshot until it actually becomes a final > > > > >> release... Ideally it would go - *SNAPSHOT -> BETA, RC, RC2.... - > > > > >> Release* - > > > > >> but by keeping it snapshots until the "final" release will > probably > > > easy > > > > >> the process, unless ASF requires otherwise. > > > > >> > > > > >> By the way, I'm looking into this - > > > > >> https://github.com/researchgate/gradle-release and not sure we > > > already > > > > use > > > > >> that in our scripts. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Anthony Baker <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> I was looking in our gradle.properties file: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> versionNumber = 1.0.0-incubating > > > > >>> releaseType = SNAPSHOT > > > > >>> > > > > >>> I’m not sure what the releaseType should be for a non-SNAPSHOT > > > release > > > > >> :-) > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Given that version is set to: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> version = versionNumber + '-' + releaseType > > > > >>> > > > > >>> I'm wondering if we should just simplify this and set the version > > > > >> directly > > > > >>> in the properties file. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Thoughts? > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Anthony > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> -- > > > > >> > > > > >> William Markito Oliveira > > > > >> -- For questions about Apache Geode, please write to > > > > >> *[email protected] > > > > >> <[email protected]>* > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > -John > > > > > 503-504-8657 > > > > > john.blum10101 (skype) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > -John > > > 503-504-8657 > > > john.blum10101 (skype) > > > > > > -- William Markito Oliveira -- For questions about Apache Geode, please write to *[email protected] <[email protected]>*
