+1 On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Anthony Baker <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sounds like the consensus is to use the Spring conventions (note that we > can always change later…most projects I surveyed have evolved their release > naming over time). Shall we also adopt Swapnil’s suggestion to change from > alpha1 to M1? That is: > > 1.0.0-incubating.M1 > > Anthony > > > > > On Jan 8, 2016, at 7:36 PM, Niall Pemberton <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 3:06 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Note, that in ASF the RCs are NOT published into public Maven > >> repo and are generally not disclosed ouside of the dev. community. > >> > > > > I think in this discussion the proposal is to use "RC" in the version of > an > > official ASF release (e.g. "1.0.0-RC1") - if thats the case it > could/would > > be published to the public Maven repo and advertised outside the dev > > community. > > > > Niall > > > > > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Roman. > >> > >> 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) > >> > > -- -John 503-504-8657 john.blum10101 (skype)
