On 1 February 2017 at 18:37, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote:
> If it was considered for back port then it seems a 6.2.0 would be > better if sticking to a strict semver format, though I wouldn't overly > mind if it was just included in a 6.1.2 with any intended bugfixes > either if folks really didn't want to have a 6.2.x a couple months > before doing 7.0.0, though I don't see a huge issue with that > personally. I also don't think it would be unreasonable to tell anyone > that since such a 6.2.x series would be so similar to 6.1.x, renamed > only on semver grounds for a fairly isolated feature many folks wont > touch, that there won't be any more 6.1.x releases to cut down on the > overhead of maintaining two almost identical release branches. > > I guess the main thing is really how much work it is to back port it, > which I can't say I know. > I think the work to backport from trunk to a branch from 6.1.x should be pretty trivial. In terms of versioning, I'm probably more "liberal" in what I would allow in a 6.1.2 release than others would be, though given that this essentially adds (in a compatible manner) to the (REST) API around the JDBC virtualhost(node), I can see why we would want this to be a 6.2. Fundamentally using semantic versioning is supposed to help the user base, if by using it we hold off on releasing a feature that is useful to our userbase because it means that we worry about having too many versions, it feels like we are doing something wrong. (I hate myself for suggesting this, but one *horrible* way of avoiding a 6.2 while still adding the feature to 6.x is, I guess, simply not making the attribute "managed" in 6.1.x, just using the context variable for the prefix... so it can be changed by setting the context variable, but there is no change in the API) -- Rob > > Robbie > > On 1 February 2017 at 15:17, Lorenz Quack <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello Rabih, > > > > Unfortunately, the v7 release is still a couple of months away. > > Out of curiosity, what is your time-line for when you would like this > > feature to land? > > > > We were considering back porting this but there are currently no plans > for a > > 6.2.0 release and as a new feature this is not really fit for a bug fix > > release (i.e. 6.1.2). > > Our limited resources are currently focused on v7 but it does involve a > fair > > amount of work. > > > > Sorry that this is probably not he answer you were hoping for. > > > > Kind regards, > > Lorenz > > > > > > > > On 01/02/17 14:35, Rabih M wrote: > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> The question is in the title. > >> I am asking because we are interested in > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-7558 > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Rabih > >> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
