Hi Shindig community,

Following up from the previous discussion about Shindig version number
I would like to discuss the release plan for Shindig moving forward.

Since we are planning to change the next release for Shindig from
3.0.0 to 2.5.0 to align with OpenSocial spec number it currently
support/implement, we need to find consistent version labeling for
future Shindig releases.

Give Shindig release version is following Maven format of
<major>.<minor>.<revision> here is one proposal:
-) The major part of the release version number should align with
major version of the OpenSocial spec.
-) The minor part indicates the release cycle for Shindig itself. This
part does not align with the minor part of the OpenSocial spec number.
-) The revision part can be used to indicate possible patches in a
particular releases.

For example, Since the next OpenSocial spec version released is 2.0.1,
so the next Shindig number is 2.5.0. The "2" represent the major part
of the OpenSocial spec number, and "5" is just release cycle for
Shindig (we could actually go with 2.1 but since we have so many
changes since 2.0 release thats why I proposed 2.5) and "0" is the
revision number for the release.
So, if after 2.5.0 we have major changes in infrastructure or
implementation we could release 2.6.0.
And if small patches needed in 2.5.0 that do not have big impact on
how the flow executed (for example just change in JavaScript files
without changes in Java or PHP code) we could just roll 2.5.1, 2.5.2,
and so on.

The plan is to not to make one to one mapping with OpenSocial spec
number but just to align the releases so its easier to link and
provide tighter relationship between spec work and the reference
implementation.
I know  that spec number and implementation do not have to match with
each other, but given how rapid the spec development release cycle and
the Shindig impl itself I think this approach will work well.

Any thoughts or inputs are welcomed. If this approach is acceptable I
will make JIRA case for the change.


Thanks,

- Henry

Reply via email to