I don't think 1.0 means feature complete (there's really no such thing in an evolving project, only milestone complete) but it does make some promises about feature stability. I do think ng's feature set is stable in that it is maintainable and can act as the basis for future expansion. A major version bump also means no backward incompatible changes which I'm admittedly a little less sure of. I don't feel super strong about the version number we use but I also don't want to be 1.0-phobic either. I'm not against going 0.10 but I do want to indicate this is significantly different than 0.9.x. Another way of looking at it is to say that we've broken backward compat so we should bump the major version.
Mentors, is there any other ASF connotation to calling something a new major version? I want to make sure I understand what I'm talking about. ;) On Dec 2, 2011, at 8:45 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <[email protected]> wrote: > Just throwing this out there, but other projects use 1.0 as an indicator of > feature completeness. Is that the implication we want to make by labeling > this as 1.0.0-xxx? > > I feel that a pre-1.0.0 number such as 0.10.0 might be more apt. > > Jon. > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Arvind Prabhakar <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The policy documents pointed out by Ralph states the following: >> >> <quote> >> Releases that only represent a project milestone and are intended only >> for bleeding-edge developers working outside the project are called >> "alpha" >> </quote> >> >> This is completely inline with where we are with the Flume NG branch >> and would be an appropriate release artifact to help enable the >> borader community to help test and validate its design. >> >> I am a strong +1 on going forward with the 1.0.0-alpha-1 release. >> >> Thanks, >> Arvind >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Ralph Goers >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Take a look at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what as well as >> the section that follows it. Releases are the only approved way of >> delivering our software to end users. While we can suggest that they check >> it out from subversion and try it in practice that doesn't usually get a >> lot of traction and it is a bit more difficult to report issues. >>> >>> I also recommend going through with the release as it is an important >> step in moving through the incubator. It is expected that issues will occur >> during the release and having problems occur on an alpha release is less of >> a problem then on a GA release. >>> >>> In short, I highly recommend a release. >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>> On Nov 29, 2011, at 4:53 PM, Eric Sammer wrote: >>> >>>> All: >>>> >>>> I wanted to kick off a conversation around producing an alpha release of >>>> the Flume NG branch. The goal would be to create a downloadable artifact >>>> for people to test and play with without needing to build the project >> from >>>> source. For lack of a better name, I'm proposing we call this >>>> flume-1.0.0-alpha1. This isn't a formal vote, but a straw man >> discussion. >>>> What do people think? Discuss! >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> -- >>>> Eric Sammer >>>> twitter: esammer >>>> data: www.cloudera.com >>> >> > > > > -- > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay) > // Software Engineer, Cloudera > // [email protected]
