Hi, Am Freitag, den 30.05.2008, 15:08 +0200 schrieb Dominik Süß: > Proposal for this and future releases: > Versionname: 2.0.0-RC1
I disagree. Our initial release is not a release candidate. The code is good and works and is proven. It is just documentation which still lacking and which we are constantly enhancing. > And trying to define a roadmap leading to the final release. There is no final release and there never will be ;-) We expect to have a constant stream of releases once the first full-blown release has been cut. Remember we will release all-at-once just once. After that, each module will have its own release cycle and versioning. This is not to say, that we neglect your concerns regarding documentation, we have the same. But we also have other concerns. And so we weight the concerns against each other and come to the conclusion to release-early-release-often, even though documentation is not 100% up to date. Regards Felix > Dominik > > > On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 3:02 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Dominik Süß <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > So why is it defined as major release(just looking at the version number) > > > without being a final release?... > > > > Good point, I agree that 2.0.0 might sound a bit too final for the > > current state of the project - the code is fairly solid and > > feature-complete, but I agree with you that docs and examples are > > lacking. > > > > I would feel better if the version number was 0.9.0, but considering > > that we've been using 2.0.0-SNAPSHOT for ages, I doubt it is possible > > to change that at this point, without causing major Maven confusion > > (aaarghhh - we don't want Maven confusion do we?). > > > > What do others think? > > > > -Bertrand > >
