Hi, For the sake of simplicity (for the users) I would go for grouped releases and keep maven in sync with other releases.
Wouter On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:47, Andreas Kollegger < [email protected]> wrote: > Hello fellow graphytes, > > Today I offer for your consideration one of the classic unsolved problems > of computer science: proper versioning. > > Neo4j is a available as individual library components and also pre-packaged > collections of components. The obvious challenge is to maintain a coherent > set of tested, known-good and compatible components. As we move towards > regular milestone releases, what's the best way to control and inform about > the various versions that are included? > > Use cases include: > > 1. I'm a maven developer, and want coherent dependencies > 2. I develop offline, and want to know what combination of libs to download > 3. I deploy neo4j as a server, and want to upgrade a component without > breaking things > > Assuming that zip files (or similar) will always use the corresponding > release version, the versioning of the included components could vary. For a > milestone release with an overall group version of 1.2-M1, permutations of > an individual component (the fictional neo4j-foo) version could be: > > Opt. | mvn version | download version > --------------------------------------- > 1 | foo-0.7 | foo-0.7 > 2 | foo-0.7 | foo-1.2-M1 > 3 | foo-1.2-M1 | foo-1.2-M1 > 4 | foo-0.7-1.2-M1 | foo-0.7-1.2-M1 > 5 | foo-0.7 | foo-0.7-1.2-M1 > > Questions include: > 1. Should individual components keep their own versions, or defer to the > grouped release version? > 2. Should the maven version keep in sync with the non-maven version? > > Opinions? > > Cheers, > Andreas > > _______________________________________________ > Neo4j mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > _______________________________________________ Neo4j mailing list [email protected] https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
