According to <http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#naming>
"[...] Whilst in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name should contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy insists that it must also contain incubating (though small variations for the sake of readability are usually acceptable). For example, for podling foo, both apache-foo-incubating and foo-incubating would be acceptable names." So, as I already suggested/adopted to/in other podlings, adopting the pattern (\d+\.\d+\.\d+)-incubating(-SNAPSHOT)? would be painless (it will be just a matter of changing the version number rather than the podling name) HTH, -Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi http://www.99soft.org/ On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 3/12/12 12:06 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò a écrit : > >> On 12/03/2012 11:58, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: >>> >>> Le 3/12/12 11:27 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò a écrit : >>>> >>>> On 10/03/2012 13:38, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Seems like the x.y.z scheme please you. >>>> >>>> >>>> It seems so :-) >>>> >>>>> I'd like to expose some of the issues we had to face in the Directory >>>>> project , just FYI : >>>>> - Using Milestones helped us a lot to get frequent releases. Without >>>>> them, we were stuck with very long delay between releases, and that was >>>>> killing us and our users. Don't hesitate to create as many milestones as >>>>> necessary. Here, Eclipse is a good example of what is good. However, >>>>> Milestones should not be issues each time you fix a bug... There is a >>>>> balance between frequent releases and too frequent releases :) >>>>> - RCs tells the user that the project is ready to be tested. You will >>>>> only fix issues (well, hopefully) >>>>> - You will have to decide if you should release major version >>>>> frequently (à la FF/Chrome) or less fequently (à la Httpd). I personally >>>>> don't like the Jenckins way (ie, a new release every now and then, they >>>>> are >>>>> now at 1.454 !) >>>>> >>>>> Now, this is your project, so your choice ! >>>> >>>> >>>> Personally, I would try to find a third way between Httpd and FF / >>>> Chrome: what if we do something like as OpenJPA [1]? >>>> >>>> I like the RC approach (we used that for last stable release at >>>> GoogleCode), but I am not sure I can figure out how to work with milestone >>>> + >>>> maven: is there any ASF reference for this? >>> >>> We use Milestones at Directory and MINA. So far, not an issue. As M < RC, >>> it should work like a charm. >> >> >> Ok nice: I was able to figure them out by taking a look at >> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/mina and subdirs: thanks. >> >> Hence, I can finally say that I would like to proceed with both RC and >> Milestones. >> >> Now: should we move artifacts to 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT and JIRA to >> 1.0.0-incubating? >> In my opinion: yes. > > Don't. The releases you will do will not be any different from any Apache > TLP release. If a release is not compliant, it won't be voted +1. > > > > -- > Regards, > Cordialement, > Emmanuel Lécharny > www.iktek.com >
