OK, so maybe I was a bit hasty in having the vote for all the release numbers, but really, folks can -1 my proposals without having to worry about my feelings. Really. And, by calling the vote, I want to follow it up with action, not just have the discussion fad into obscurity.

However you want to name them, it really comes down to the same set of releases. It is just which confusion one wants to mitigate in the user base. All options have some amount of confusion, as far as I can tell.

Option 1 - What we have now. 1.2.11 with just jms. 1.2.12 with TRACE and bug fixes. 1.3 release is the next major release on the cvs head. Confusion/issue - Adding TRACE to the 1.2 branch can be thought of as a "new" feature since it does change the api in a way that might not be expected by 1.2 users.

Option 2 - 1.2.11 with just jms (and maybe throw in the bug fixes for the current 1.2.12 scheduled release). 1.3 based on last release of 1.2.X with the TRACE changes and some more deprecation in prep for the next major release. 1.4 release is the next major release on the cvs head. Confusion/issue - We've already been releasing version 1.3 alpha versions. Switching it to just 1.2 + TRACE will need to be explained, plus the explaining of the new 1.4 version. I guess we could do a simultaneous release of 1.3 and 1.4 so folks have the latest 1.4 alpha (cvs head) to continue playing with.

Another option I am not seeing (besides skipping version numbers, which no one really liked)?

We are going to do a 1.2.11 build. I don't think having our most recent build recalled with no replacement is a good thing. We need to release something to replace it. I also think that with the next major release pending until much later this year, we need to release something that users will find useful. TRACE seems to fit that bill. Fixes for annoying bugs is a good thing.

What do people want as far as numbering?

-Mark




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to