+1 (If I get to vote :-) )
5.0 is looking like a lot bigger deal on the usability features than
when the original jump was discussed several months ago.
It would be nice to have users to actually try those features before
RC1 of Final. Which requires some articles to drive adoption, etc.
4.0 was a major change. The alpha/beta allowed a more lengthened period of
time for users to experiment with upgrading. But 5.0 doesn't have anything
crazy. Codecs are stable and easily upgrade when changes/bugfixes are
needed.
Furthermore, the alpha/beta logic in Version.java is/was very
sounds good, I’m +1 - 5.0 is a big deal and it’ll be good to get the
“5.0-FINAL” as solid as possible. Having an alpha release would surely get a
larger number of folks trying it out.
Erik
On Jan 6, 2015, at 2:48 PM, Anshum Gupta ans...@anshumgupta.net wrote:
I'd like to suggest
my main concern with the alpha is the lucene index format logic. This
gets fairly messy and doing this for 4.x actually caused backwards
compatibility bugs.
If we can avoid alpha/beta releases it would be really nice.
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Anshum Gupta ans...@anshumgupta.net wrote:
Sure, it was a thought and I think I'm with you (and Robert) on that now.
Let's just call it 5.0!
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Ryan Ernst r...@iernst.net wrote:
4.0 was a major change. The alpha/beta allowed a more lengthened period
of time for users to experiment with upgrading. But
I'd like to suggest that we call the next release 5.0 alpha and follow it
with either 5.0 or 5.0 beta (if need be) on the lines of the 4x releases.
As for the history behind calling it that, here's a post about the 4.0
alpha release that should clarify things I'm thinking about.
