Well, I think it shouldn't be a 2.1.2, the last number should be only incremented when the release is about fixes and doesn't break things.
In my point of view the next version should be a 2.2 as it seems to break things even if it is only on the jaxrs spec, and then a 2.3 version could be the next one as it seems to bring even more changes. While I think it cannot be entirely applied there, I'll tell you versionning scheme I had on some past project: X.Y.Z-R Where X is mean for breaking changes of the API, Y for additions to the API, Z for internal code changes without any API modification, and R for patches of the current revision. On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 20:08, Johnson, Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm +1 on including the changes in 2.1.2. Sergey's comments lead me to > believe that the changes will not have an impact on a majority of users > of the JAX-RS stuff. > Also, I agree with Benson that people looking for stability are not > using the JAX-RS stuff. The spec is still a moving target. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Benson Margulies [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 11:22 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: JAX-RS version and 2.1.2 > > I'm +1 on 2.1.2. People who really care about stability are, I suspect, > sticking with 2.0.x. > > A compromise would be to announce the intention to include in in 2.1.3, > and try to really push down the defect count in 2.1.2. Then people who > want to stay on the old spec could stay on 2.1.2. > > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Sergey's commit brings up an interesting topic for discussion: > > > > In general, when doing patch releases, I've tried to keep the impact > > to a bare minimum. I have ported new features to the patch branches, > but pretty > > much only if it doesn't affect existing usage. Sergey has done a > > fantastic job of updating the JAX-RS stuff to the latest 0.8 spec and > > it would be good to get people to change to using that. However, it > is a > > change that could affect existing code. So, should that be part of > 2.1.2 > > or wait for 2.2? > > > > Pros/cons of adding to 2.1.2: > > Pro: It's significantly better and has a bunch of bugs fixed > > Pro: It's closer to the final spec (although the spec is still > > changing) > > Pro: Going forward, people will need to migrate to it anyway > > > > Con: it does affect existing apps > > > > > > The main con to making it 2.2 only is that 2.2 is quite a ways away. > > People have been asking for some of this stuff so making them wait > > that long could be an issue. > > > > Anyway, I'd like peoples thoughts on this. I've cc'd the users list > as > > well as I'd really like the users opinions as well. If the users > are > > willing to take the migration hit, I'm more than OK with putting it > > for 2.1.2. > > > > > > --- > > Daniel Kulp > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog > > > > > > > > > > > -- Brice Dutheil
