Also 2.0 or 2.0.0 for me
On 3 Feb 2014, at 7:41, Ralph Goers wrote:
I had thought it would be 2.0.
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 2, 2014, at 8:59 PM, Nick Williams
<nicho...@nicholaswilliams.net> wrote:
I'm finalizing the logging chapter of my book to send to the printers
Wednesday (I'm so glad I got to correct it to say Level was
extendable!), and I need to know what the Maven artifact GA version
number will be. I print the new Maven artifacts used in each chapter
on the first page of the chapter as a guide to the user. Log4j is the
only library I'm using that isn't yet GA. I want to be sure the
version numbers I'm printing are correct.
Here are the options that I can think of for the GA release:
2.0
2.0-GA
2.0.GA
2.0.Final
2.0.RELEASE
2.0.0
2.0.0-GA
2.0.0.GA
2.0.0.Final
2.0.0.RELEASE
So, which is it going to be? I assume that eventually we're going to
have a 2.0.1, 2.0.2, etc., so it would seem to me that, whatever GA
is, it should start with 2.0.0. Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense
to go from 2.0 to 2.0.1. However, all of our beta releases have been
2.0-Betan.
Thoughts?
Nick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
---
http://www.grobmeier.de
The Zen Programmer: http://bit.ly/12lC6DL
@grobmeier
GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
