Thanks John for the comments, appreciate it.
Let me capture this on a wiki page and then hopefully others can also add to
it.
We can also have a wish list to add the nice to haves, but as u said it's
important to agree on the "must haves" and defined plan on how to achive
them. Once I create the
Ah - its good to see the real reason is RPM versioning, which is fine.
I'm +1 for having Mx and translate this mechanically to some RPM version.
But don't make the version numbers rise too fast, and don't start too high.
We will regret that.
In some ways, getting a "build number" in would be nice
On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 14:50 -0500, Alan Conway wrote:
> For RPM purposes we need to use the simple numeric version.release up
> front so rpm can figure out the ordering, but I think we can safely add
> a decorator to meet the apache requirement (RPM experts can you
> confirm? I checked the rpm
Re version numbers and RPM versions etc. I have a proposal.
Daniel Kulp wrote:
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 17:15, Alan Conway wrote:
On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 17:03 -0500, Daniel Kulp wrote:
Just FYI: that needs to be changed before the release. If the
artifact doesn't have "incubator" in t
Alan,
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 16:50, Alan Conway wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 12:14 -0500, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> > > I suggest we don't get to caught up in the nomeclature of our
> > > releases. Moving to a numbering scheme similar to AMQP is perhaps a
> > > reasonable approach. We started
On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 12:14 -0500, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> > I suggest we don't get to caught up in the nomeclature of our
> > releases. Moving to a numbering scheme similar to AMQP is perhaps a
> > reasonable approach. We started using Mx as that is the Incubator way.
+1 on not getting caught u
On 06/03/07, Rajith Attapattu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Folks,
I think it's a good time to get the ball rolling on the release plan for
post M2.
Here are some suggestions to start of with.
Visioning:
I suggest to move away from Mx (or milestones) releases and use a numbering
On 3/6/07, Martin Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 06/03/07, Rajith Attapattu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I think it's a good time to get the ball rolling on the release plan for
> post M2.
> Here are some suggestions to start of with.
>
&g
Folks,
I think it's a good time to get the ball rolling on the release plan for
post M2.
Here are some suggestions to start of with.
Visioning:
I suggest to move away from Mx (or milestones) releases and use a numbering
scheme like 0.9x.x.
We could call the next release 0.90 and the subse
