Re: [DISCUSS] Metron next version rev

The question is if we actually need to back-port at all at this point. I think the assertion here is that pretty much everyone using Metron right now is currently getting patches, etc. by upgrading to the latest release. If/when we find a need to fork release branches we can certainly do it and

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron next version rev

Would the back ports also have to go through a full ‘apache release’ process and be planned out as well? I don’t think that should all be worked out as we go. On November 15, 2016 at 12:13:55, Michael Miklavcic (michael.miklav...@gmail.com) wrote: I'm a +1 on David and Nick's suggestions. 1

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron next version rev

I'm a +1 on David and Nick's suggestions. 1 and 2 now, and let 3 happen organically when the community has a need. On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:29 AM, David Lyle wrote: > I think that's an excellent understanding and suggestion on #3. > > Fwiw, the norm I've seen is to allow

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron next version rev

I think that's an excellent understanding and suggestion on #3. Fwiw, the norm I've seen is to allow the requester and the dev to work that out. Thanks, -D... On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Nick Allen wrote: > I broke down what I am understanding of your suggestion

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron next version rev

I broke down what I am understanding of your suggestion into bullet points. Please correct me if I am wrong. (1) Bump the rev immediately following a release (2) Update the current version in master to 0.4.0 (3) Maintain and back port bug fixes to a 0.3.x branch I would agree with you on items

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron next version rev

So, the notion is- we're going to have a 0.4.0 release at some future point. If, during that release cycle, we found critical bug fix type issues that we wanted to release out of cycle, we could patch the 0.3.0 branch and cut a release from there. You're correct that we'd have to commit them to

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron next version rev

We'd cut a release from master - we'd initially increment to 0.4.0-SNAPSHOT with the approach David is recommending. And any patches in 0.3.x would need to also be applied to master. On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Nick Allen wrote: > And where would the next release get

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron next version rev

And where would the next release get cut from; master or the 0.3.x branch? Or is that something we decide when we cut a release based on what we want to include? On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Nick Allen wrote: > What kind of PRs would qualify as 0.3.x fixes? How would

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron next version rev

What kind of PRs would qualify as 0.3.x fixes? How would we decide that? For those we would then have to commit them against both the 0.3.x branch and master (0.4.0), right? Off the top of your head, can you think of a few recent PRs that would qualify as patches? I'd just like to get a feel

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron next version rev

Hi Mike, I'd like to see us increment the version on master ASAP. Once 0.3.0 is released, master is no longer the 0.3.0 branch. I recommend that we run 0.3.x patches off the 0.3.0 release branch and rename master to 0.4.0. Thanks, -D... On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Michael Miklavcic <