On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Kalle Korhonen
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I fully understand Howard's reasoning but to me it comes down to
> whether you believe there is such a thing as a final release or not.
> Under the current, numbers-only release scheme, the micro version can
> be read as an indication of stability. Instinctively, it makes sense
> that micro release .0 is less stable than .9 for example. I'm worried
> that proposed, new version scheme will not have the desired effect,
> but alpha, beta,rc release will only make us release less frequently
> and each pre-release may not gain enough audience to meaningfully
> contribute to the stability of the release - in other words, what
> often happens, is that people will wait for whatever release is deemed
> "final" before coming to kick the tires. It could be argued that more
> frequent releases create more buzz (Jenkins, Jitsi as examples) since
> the *perceived* development velocity seems higher whereas less
> frequent stable releases are more desirable for existing users.
>
> It could increase users confidence in upgrading between micro versions
> if we simply guaranteed that micro versions are backwards compatible.
> I do understand Howard's concern with working on new code paths that
> are still in flux, since it's difficult to guarantee that interfaces
> for the code you are prototyping are not going change. If that leads
> to more frequent minor versions, so be it, it's not like we are going
> to run out of minor versions either. For a web framework, rather than
> an end-user product, it seems to me it's less compelling to produce a
> final release that has gone through several rounds of limited field
> testing.
>
> These are not necessarily the opposite proposals - especially if we
> are not voting on pre-releases/release previews, the actual numbered
> releases can keep the current numbering scheme as is, and previews is
> just an added step to evaluate a specific version in development (in
> other words, a mechanism to freeze a development version to share the
> same snapshot between all interested parties).
>
> A release in Apache terms is a source package on dist, any binaries
> are provided as a convenience only.
>
> Kalle

I completely agree with Kalle and I've already expressed my opinion
but if developers feels more comfortable it's a gain...

For the vote part I'm going with a -0

Cheers
-- 
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to