+1 for the pointing to MC. That would be the best approach for us. just my2cent, Alex
-- Alexander Lorenz http://mapredit.blogspot.com On Mar 19, 2012, at 8:06 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > On Mar 18, 2012, at 11:58 PM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: > >> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Ralph Goers >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 18, 2012, at 9:32 PM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: >>> >>>> We have already made a lesser stable release (version >>>> 1.0.0-incubating) that was labeled as alpha in the RELEASE-NOTES file >>>> that accompanied it. >>> >>> Yes - and not putting -alpha in the version was a mistake. >>> >>>> From this thread, I see that the consensus is to >>>> call the 1.1.0 release a beta. >>>> >>>> I would therefore like to proceed with the release, with the official >>>> version 1.1.0-incubating, and specifically labeled as "beta" in the >>>> release notes. Since we are not calling it a 1.1.0-incubating-stable >>>> or 1.1.0-incubating-GA, we do not risk implying the stability or >>>> correctness of the released artifacts. >>> >>> Please, please, please go look at Maven Central. Rarely will you find >>> 1.1.0-GA (User's dislike that immensely). But you will find tons of >>> 1.1.0-beta1, 1.1.0-beta2, etc. The way people expect this is that we would >>> have had a 1.0.0-alpha1, 1.0.0-alpha2 and then 1.0.0-beta1, 1.0.0-beta2. >>> We didn't do that. We should start now. When it is considered not to be a >>> beta then 1.1.0 should be released. >> >> I have no objections to doing the work if we have consensus or policy >> that guides it. The opinion on this thread is split and I do not want >> to chose one over the other. Hence am following what has been done in >> the project before. >> >>> >>> I'm having a hard time understanding why you really want to do this so >>> differently than what the vast majority of other projects do. >> >> For the reasons stated above - lack of consensus or guiding policy. >> Since you feel very strongly about this, I suggest you help establish >> a policy by calling a vote on this. My only request to you would be to >> not block this release waiting for the policy to be established. > > Sure - as an example of an existing policy you can look at > http://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html#Release_Numbers. > > Release votes can't be vetoed so one person cannot block them. I would only > vote -1 if I found something wrong with the release such as a missing notice > or license. However, I might vote -0.5 on something like this. > > Ralph
