+1 as well but also agree with Romain, We can do that after the release.
Jlouis Le 1 oct. 2011 09:05, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <[email protected]> a écrit : > Does it mean we should refactor trunk after the release (i guess so)? > > - Romain > > Le 1 oct. 2011 01:13, "Karan Malhi" <[email protected]> a écrit : >> This is a great point David. Nice catch with the version number. This >> is a brand new product and versioning should start with 1.0. >> +1 for the version change. >> >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:03 PM, David Blevins <[email protected]> > wrote: >>> Just remember a thought I had before going to bed last night.... >>> >>> Calling Apache TomEE a 4.0.0-beta-1 is a big mistake. >>> >>> Should be Apache TomEE a 1.0.0-beta-1. >>> >>> I think we're probably working against ourselves by not making it as new > and exciting as possible. Some people might be confused "4.0? why haven't I > heard of this before, it must suck" whereas no one will be confused by 1.0. > Are we trying to launch and old and established and mature product or > something new and exciting? >>> >>> I now remember thinking just at that moment before falling asleep .. > "well, you can always increase the version number later, but you can never > decrease it." Seems like if we regret calling 4.x in the future, we'll > never be able to fix it. At least with 1.x, we can still do what we want at > a future date. >>> >>> >>> So in that vein I'm going to roll a version with the 1.0.0-beta-1 > version. I have a fixed batch of binaries with the 4.0.0-beta-1 version > number staged and ready to go: >>> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenejb-016/ >>> >>> If we don't like the feel of 1.0.0-beta-1, we can release the above set > of binaries and the tag. >>> >>> >>> >>> -David >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Karan Singh Malhi >> twitter.com/KaranSinghMalhi
