Trunk is now 1.4-SNAPSHOT in r667767 and a fresh build runs ok for me.
Based on all this thread 1.4-SNAPSHOT isn't perfect but seemed what there
was best consensus for right now. Feel free to revisit and I'd be happy to
do the work to change trunk version to something else if anyone can get
consen
On 6/13/08, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Are the OSGI "real" versions required to be numeric, which would also mean
> 1.x wouldn't work so well as a version for OSGi right?
Yes, the versions need to be numeric, 1.x wont work.
...ant
>
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Rajini Sivar
Are the OSGI "real" versions required to be numeric, which would also mean
1.x wouldn't work so well as a version for OSGi right?
...ant
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ant,
>
> I am not sure how relevant this is, but in the context of versioning
Ant,
I am not sure how relevant this is, but in the context of versioning Tuscany
for OSGi, Tuscany modules are being built as OSGi bundles with "real"
versions (eg. the current build uses "2.0"). The version used is not
currently derived from the maven version, instead it is specified
independent
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 8:48 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Luciano Resende wrote:
> > >>
> > >> How about 1.
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Luciano Resende wrote:
> >>
> >> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> >> couple releases without
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Luciano Resende wrote:
> >>
> >> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> >> couple releases without th
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Luciano Resende wrote:
>>
>> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
>> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
>> version. And this would probably make ev
I am not intimately involved in day to day coding and I am not attached to
any of the branches or the names :) So, take this comment as a 3rd person's
point of view.
1.x relays the message that 1.0 and incremental releases of 1.0 are spawned
off of this version of the code.
2.x relays the message
Luciano Resende wrote:
How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri
Simon Laws wrote:
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
On F
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
> version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
>
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2
That seems a little odd to me, i'd prefer just "snapshot", 1.x, or the
actual next number over 1.5.
...ant
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
> couple releases without the necessit
How about 1.5-SNAPSHOT ? This would probably give us some room to have
couple releases without the necessity to keep updating the trunk pom
version. And this would probably make everybody happy :)
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:14 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
> the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
> release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
> release would b
I guess part of problem here is because a lot of people assume that
the maven artifact version represents what is going to be our next
release and then, if it's set as 2.0-SNAPSHOT, it means our next
release would be 2.0. But I tend to take these two pieces as two
different things, the maven pom ve
Which number?
If we pick the next number - we've just done a 1.2 release so the trunk
version could now be "1.3-SNAPSHOT" which is the way we've done in the past
- then every time we branch for the next release we also have to update the
trunk. Thats a bit more work but also it means that *everyo
Ant,
+1 in general - by why not simply choose a number, rather than "x"?
- the problem with "x" is "what comes next?"
Yours, Mike.
ant elder wrote:
Lots of different views so far on this thread, better than no one replying
:) I'm tempted to go with "1.x-SNAPSHOT" as I think from whats been s
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 8:43 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simon Laws wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> 2008/6/4 ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need
to
Simon Laws wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2008/6/4 ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need to
remove "incubating" at some point and as its not clear if the next
release
would be 2.0
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> The good thing about having a version on the pom is that you can have
> multiple SNAPSHOTs available in a maven repo (e.g 1.2-SNAPSHOT,
> 1.2.1-SNAPSHOT, TRUNK x-SNAPSHOT and TRUNK y-SNAPSHOT), this also
> allows for mult
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:59 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Changing SCA trunk version from 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT to
SNAPSHOT
The good thing about having a version on the pom is that you can have
multiple SNAPSHOTs available in a maven repo (e.g 1.2-SNAPSHOT,
1.2.1-S
The good thing about having a version on the pom is that you can have
multiple SNAPSHOTs available in a maven repo (e.g 1.2-SNAPSHOT,
1.2.1-SNAPSHOT, TRUNK x-SNAPSHOT and TRUNK y-SNAPSHOT), this also
allows for multiple active development streams.
If you have SNAPSHOT only, I guess you are restric
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/6/4 ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need to
> > remove "incubating" at some point and as its not clear if the next
> release
> > would be 2.0 or somet
2008/6/4 ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Currently the trunk has a version of 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT, we need to
> remove "incubating" at some point and as its not clear if the next release
> would be 2.0 or something else so i wondered if we should also remove the
> 2.0 giving a trunk version of
25 matches
Mail list logo
