sp<number> will be easy
not sure when the test harness will be ready :P

2010/9/2 Robert Scholte <[email protected]>

>  +1 on the sp<number> postfix for all gwt-m-p's and of course the test
> harness
>
>
> - Robert
>
> ------------------------------
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 21:14:01 +0200
>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [Vote] [gwt] align gwt-maven releases with GWT ones
>
> GWT has followed this convention for a while, I can't see reason they
> change this.
> Also notice Google guys WANT to intergate nicelly into maven, so we can
> expect them not to make breaking changes without a chance for us to warn.
>
> another thing to consider, is that such multi release of gwt-maven for a
> single gwt release will only for critical bug fixes, so that we can consider
> any other naming scheme when this happen, x.y.z.sp1, x.y.z.fix1 ot whatever
> we want. Anyway, user requiring a bugfix used to rely on SNAPSHOT as we did
> few releases in the past. Considering two years of gwt-maven-plugin GWT
> released minor releases 3 or 4 time quicker than we do, so we have many
> reason to wait next release to integrate bug fixes.
>
> The best way to avoid breaking bugs would be to have a test harness, that
> we don't have today. This will be my major task after 2.1 release...
>
> Nicolas
>
> 2010/9/2 Robert Scholte <[email protected]>
>
> So this ASSUMES that GWT will follow the x.y.z version pattern (and as we
> all know: assumption is the mother of all....).
> I think there are two options:  version could look like x.y.z.a, where 'a'
> is the plugin-version for GWT x.y.z, or x.y.z-mgwt-1.0 or something like
> that.
> The latter is always safe, but it'll result in an ugly version pattern and
> I hope Maven can handle such version (I believe so)
>
> - Robert
>
> ------------------------------
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 08:12:36 +0200
>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [Vote] [gwt] align gwt-maven releases with GWT ones
>
> GWT minor releases come often (more more often gwt-maven ones)
> For critical bugfix releases, we can release a <gwt version x.y.z>.fix
> release. Next GWT version is 2.1.0, and if we discover a critical bug we can
> release a 2.1.0.1.
>
> Considering two years of dev on this plugin, we can also wait for next gwt
> minor release that occured quicker than the time required for us to fix a
> bug :P
>
> 2010/9/1 Robert Scholte <[email protected]>
>
> I have my doubts...
>
> I don't know the amount of time it usualy takes before GWT comes with a new
> release, but if this takes too long, we might run into some trouble.
> What if we have bugfixes and new features on a already released version?
> Suppose we have GWT-2.1 and the gwt-m-p-2.1, should the fixed version be
> gwt-m-p-2.1.1? Gotcha!, because a week later GWT also discovered some
> serious issues and releases a 2.1.1 as well. Now both versions are out of
> sync again.
> It might sounds logic, but I think it would only work if GWT itself
> releases the maven plugin as part of a suite.
> Although the versions are pretty close to each other, I wouldn't try to
> follow the GWT-version.
>
> - Robert
>
> > From: [email protected]
> > Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 21:59:16 +0200
>
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [Vote] [gwt] align gwt-maven releases with GWT
> ones
>
> >
> > +1
> >
> > 2010/8/30 nicolas de loof <[email protected]>:
> > > Hi,
> > > With many API and options changes between GWT releases, the plugin gets
> more
> > > complex any time Google guys release a new SDK version. I'd like to
> change
> > > the plugin design to "align" gwt-maven to a GWT sdk release.
> > > The planned action are :
> > >
> > > Move trunk to a new "1.3" branch (if someone wants to support it and
> fix
> > > bugs)
> > > Start changes in trunk as "2.1", to be released when GWT 2.1 is final.
> > > Remove all dynamic artifact resolution depending on requested GWT
> version
> > > Remove support for older releases of the SDK
> > > Add explicit dependency on GWT 2.1 artifacts
> > > Support only GWT 2.1 features
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 let's do that
> > > [ ] 0 don't care
> > > [ ] -1 Please don't do that, because ...
> > > Nicolas
> > > Nicolas
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Olivier
> > http://twitter.com/olamy
> > http://fr.linkedin.com/in/olamy
> > http://www.viadeo.com/fr/profile/olivier.lamy7
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
> >
> > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to