+1.

---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library

> On Nov 8, 2016, at 9:18 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> +1
> 
> On 8 Nov 2016 1:56 pm, "Andy Seaborne" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Well, 3.1.1 should have been 3.2.0 so lets pretend 3.1.1 is 3.2.0-beta.
>> :-)  So if we have to get out a bug-fixing "3.1.2" or anything even quite
>> soon, 3.2.0 is still a reasonable choice.
>> 
>> It is much easier to set the version now. It sets into all sorts of places
>> like written down in JIRA and email.
>> 
>>    Andy
>> 
>> On 08/11/16 13:26, Claude Warren wrote:
>> 
>>> Should we wait for the change that causes the version jump first.  I would
>>> think that we would have 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT and then *if* JENA-1250 causes an
>>> incompatible change jump the version to 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT
>>> 
>>> But I can go either way
>>> 
>>> +0
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Osma Suominen <[email protected]
>>>> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 08.11.2016, 12:33, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Should the next version be 3.2.0?
>>>>> 
>>>>> The Lucene file format may well change.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If we want that, I'll go and update the POM versions.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> +1 for calling it 3.2.0.
>>>> 
>>>> Yes, the Lucene upgrade (JENA-1250) will very likely go into the next
>>>> release in some form and change the Lucene index on-disk format.
>>>> 
>>>> -Osma
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Osma Suominen
>>>> D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
>>>> National Library of Finland
>>>> P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
>>>> 00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
>>>> Tel. +358 50 3199529
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://www.nationallibrary.fi
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 

Reply via email to