+1 -Marshall
On 12/12/2012 8:17 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
> Am 12.12.2012 um 14:10 schrieb Peter Klügl <[email protected]>:
>> On 12.12.2012 13:57, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
>>> On 12/12/2012 01:53 PM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>>>> Thanks for the answers.
>>>>
>>>> The next question: What about the version number of the TextMarker release?
>>>>
>>> If you align with the UIMA releases you are somehow bound to its
>>> development cycle, in
>>> case you want to release more frequently this could be problematic.
>>>
>> Yes, at least for the beginning this can be problematic. However, I do not
>> know if it is better to start with 1.0.0 or even 0.1.0.
>>
>> Is there a possibility for releases with sub-versions or additional build
>> numbers? Then again, the more frequent releases would be especially of the
>> type "maintenance", which corresponds to the third digit.
>
> You could also want to make minor or major releases independent from the UIMA
> release cycle, e.g. when you introduce new features, change the script
> grammar or do other potentially incompatible changes (e.g. fully qualified
> type names and aliases for them? ;) ).
>
> -- Richard
>
