> On Aug 5, 2013, at 20:03, Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I am actually still +1 for just 2.5.1. We agreed that Shindig version will > adhere to OpenSocial specs up to minor version which in this case is 2.5.x
What about developing in trunk at 2.5.1-alphaX and branching for fixes in 2.5.0-update1? I also think 2.5.1 should be relatively minor in changes to the software itself. Ideally, only additions and no breaking changes to existing interfaces, etc. > > - Henry > > >> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Ryan Baxter <rbaxte...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Here is what I found on version numbers [1]. From what I gather after >> reading that using 2.5.0.1 would be considered "non-standard". The >> only downside to this would be the version numbers would be compared >> as strings. We could use 2.5.0-fix1 which would be considered >> standard, but I don't think that buys us anything with regards to >> version comparison. I could pose a question to the Maven users list >> and see if they have any advice. >> >> [1] >> http://books.sonatype.com/mvnref-book/reference/pom-relationships-sect-pom-syntax.html >> >> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Stanton Sievers <ssiev...@apache.org> >> wrote: >>> +1. Shindig-1924 is one such cleanup. I also agree with staying in line >>> with the spec. >>> >>> I would just want to make sure we have no technical or process issues >> with >>> maven artifacts (or the like) with 4 numbers in the version. >>>> On Aug 5, 2013 7:29 PM, "Ryan Baxter" <rbaxte...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> The current version of trunk is set to 2.5.1. I am wondering what >>>> people think of changing that to 2.5.0.1? There are a few cleanup >>>> changes that have already been identified that would be good to get >>>> out there. At same time we want to stay in sync with the spec version >>>> so I don't think we want to release 2.5.1 yet. What does everyone >>>> think? >>
