I don't agree. I think this would be massively confusing to people if a version was missing, or several failed and you went from 3.1.0 to 3.1.3. I don't think that would make much sense to most users.
On Sep 14, 2013, at 5:49 PM, Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> wrote: > On Saturday, 14 September 2013, Dennis Lundberg wrote: > >> JIRA is not a big problem. Say for example that the 3.1.1 release was >> abandoned due to some problem, you would simply rename the version in >> JIRA from 3.1.1 to 3.1.2. > > > Exactly. > > Not a problem if you ask me... The only one I can think of if the javadoc > @since tags and even without skipping versions they can end up at a > unreleased version label, plus they are just a >= which will be valid anyway > > >> >> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I think it's mainly because the maintenance and housekeeping costs on >> the JIRA front and others which use the version nr as reference. >>> >>> >>> Imagine that you would need to move all the JIRA tickets which got >> marked as fixed in a certain release as well. Otherwise the release notes >> would be broken - or would need to get maintained manually. >>> >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: Fred Cooke <[email protected]> >>>> To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: >>>> Sent: Saturday, 14 September 2013, 21:51 >>>> Subject: Re: Leaving Maven Core POMs at major.minor-SNAPSHOT >>>> >>>> I agree on skipping failed versions! I was avoiding the topic because it >>>> seemed popular opinion was to re-spin endlessly like a child's spinning >> top. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Stephen Connolly < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Why as long as you don't push the tag, there's no big deal. Pushing >>>> the tag >>>>> is when problems appear... In any case I'd prefer to just skip failed >>>>> version numbers... Though I was voted down last time that came up, and >>>>> given I'm not running too many releases at the moment, I don't see >>>> my >>>>> opinion as being heavyweight on that subject... Version numbers are >> cheap >>>>> and we've had borked releases before (eg critical IMHO bugs in 2.1.0, >>>> 2.2.0 >>>>> and 3.1.0...) so I don't buy the "what if a user checks out a tag >>>> that was >>>>> not released" argument. >>>>> >>>>> In my opinion we need a release status page anyway, eg stating whether >>>>> specific versions are considered stabilising, stable, retired or >> advised >>>>> not to be used... Such a page would remove the need for recycling >> version >>>>> numbers *and* provide benefit to users at the same time. >>>>> >>>>> But I will leave it for others to fight the relative costs of version >>>>> numbers (given the infinite supply) against making sure JIRA release >> notes >>>>> and javadoc @since tags (which is stupid, @since 3.2.3 means it >> should be >>>>> there in the 3.3.0 release that 3.2.3 became, so no fix strictly >>>>> required) are correct and saving the risk that a user checks out an >>>>> unreleased tag and tries to build that from source and then starts >> trying >>>>> to raise bugs against a non-exist any version! >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, 14 September 2013, Jason van Zyl wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> We need a slight modification of this strategy because the changes >>>> need >>>>> to >>>>>> be pushed somewhere so that people can examine the tag if they want >>>>> during >>>>>> the release. I can't keep it on my machine until the vote passes. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sep 14, 2013, at 2:20 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1, that's what we also use in DeltaSpike and dozen other >>>> projects. >>>>>>> pushChanges=false + localCheckout=true for the win! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LieGrue, >>>>>>> strub >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>> From: Arnaud Héritier <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> Cc: >>>>> -- >> Dennis Lundberg >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] <javascript:;> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] <javascript:;> >> >> > > -- > Sent from my phone Thanks, Jason ---------------------------------------------------------- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl ---------------------------------------------------------
