On 12/02/2014 09:59 PM, Chuck Rolke wrote:
I feel like for qpidd and qpid::messaging at least, a '1.0' at this
point is meaningless and even perhaps confusing. They are both well past
that really, placing a high priority on stability and backward
compatibility. The 1.0 label to me is more appropriate for newer
components like proton, dispatch-router and the new JMS client.
There's a certain appeal to having the version number be the year.month
that the product was branched especially if we have four or five
closely related products. If some whizzy feature of the broker
is released in 15.4 then you know that it probably isn't supported in
dispatch 15.2. There's no way to know that if the broker is 3.2 and
dispatch is 1.1.
Yes, I can see the value in being able to easily determine ordering
between release numbers of components on different schedules. Also, it
may help force a more public schedule, by setting the target date in
order to determine the next release number.
My preferences in order are:
1. All products with 'year'.'month'.
2. All products switch to 3.1 on next release and increment independently.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
