> Do you think this release cycle/versioning scheme is inconsistent with
other
> projects (and thus confusing)?  I would expect the most stable release to
be
> the one with the highest last digit.  eg. I expect 2.0.4 to be more stable
> than 2.0.0.  This is how most of the other open source products (and
> closed/$$$ products for that matter) work that we use anyway.  Those
> products generally use a beta version to note unstable releases.  Examples
> in particular are log4j (we have just upgraded to 1.2.4), and Tomcat (have
> just tried to switch to 4.0.4).  I just know that if I was starting out
with
> such a product I am most likely to hunt out the latest version that
doesn't
> claim to be beta.  Perhaps the real problem is that there is little/no
> advertising of the 'stableness' of each version from the download section
on
> sourceforge.
>

I believe there's a value in conformity, but its also necessary to not
blindly follow
what other developers have done.

Tapestry's current release system reflects the fact that there is still just
one main developer, which
would make is a bit silly (but perhaps necessary?) to perform development in
a branch.

Instead, I've been developing in the HEAD, which simplifies many things
(including tracking where
bugs have been fixed).  In addition, I've found that people are often
"hungry" for the latest-and-greatest.

Perhaps I should change my naming starting in the next release; how about:

2.0.5            (rc for 2.1)
2.1                (note: no '.0')
2.2-alpha-1    (incremental releases, equivalent to dot releases)
2.2-alpha-2
2.2-beta-1       (first release candidate)
2.2-beta-2        (second release candidate)
2.2

This would more clearly identify the stability of the release, and would
more clearly show how the alpha's and beta's are leading up to the next
minor release.  Perhaps, in the future, the alpha and beta release would
occur in a development branch (there would be a 2.2-dev, or even a
2.2-hship-dev branch).
> As always - this is meant constructively.  You're doing a great job...

Thanks.

>
> Richard
>
>



-------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by:
ThinkGeek at http://www.ThinkGeek.com/
_______________________________________________
Tapestry-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tapestry-developer

Reply via email to