On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Tim Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'll chime in and mention that several people that I've talked to have > been > > confused about this. I think it would be great if the Shindig release > > version were to match the latest spec version that it fully implements. > > > The architectural version can match (opensocial-0.x == > shindig-0.[yyyy.zzzz]), but Shindig will never match the opensocial version > exactly. If I change a major interface in the code, we're still > implementing > the same opensocial version but we can not continue using the same version > number. > This sounds reasonable to me. -Dan > On Nov 20, 2008, at 11:10 AM, Dan Peterson wrote: > > > > Hey folks, > >> > >> I am really excited that we're getting to an OpenSocial v0.8 (well, > 0.8.1) > >> compliant release. I think we'll learn a lot about making Shindig a > great > >> piece of infrastructure through these releases. > >> > >> To Ian's question, I think we should be careful about the version > number: > >> it > >> seems confusing if we have OpenSocial at v0.8, but Shindig at v1.0. > >> Shindig's mission/scope is to implement the OpenSocial spec, so it's > >> awkward > >> to have different numbering systems for the releases of the > >> implementation. > >> I certainly realize that versions are just arbitrary numbers, but > sending > >> the message that Shindig is at 1.0 is over-promising with regards to > >> potentially breaking changes and stability, given the state of the > >> "underlying" spec. > >> > >> My thought was that this would be a release of Shindig v0.8. > >> > >> -Dan > >> > >> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 6:25 AM, Ian Boston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> I don't expect this to be controversial, but I should as just for > >>> process. > >>> > >>> Proposing > >>> Branch shindig to > >>> branches/1.0.x with a version of 1-SNAPSHOT > >>> increment trunk version to 1.1-SNAPSHOT indicating 1.1 will be the next > >>> release. > >>> > >>> The version numbers are more for Java than for Php, but I guess there > >>> might > >>> be a version number in the php code ? > >>> > >>> I have done a dry run of the maven release plugin and there are no > >>> issues, > >>> so it should be a simple one command process. (it also branches the php > >>> code > >>> because we left a pom in the base directory) > >>> > >>> Any comments ? > >>> Happy with the version numbers ? > >>> > >>> Ian > >>> > >>> > >>> > > -- > > Tim Moore > > Atlassian Plugin Developer > > > > > > > > > > >
