Hi Malcolm,

Malcolm Edgar wrote:

I have been giving a bit of thought to the Click versioning/branching
strategy with respect to is potential use.

I think we should run with 2 development streams:

2.x - Apache Click, this is where the framework is progressing, and
where new projects should go

1.5.x - SourceForge Click, this just includes bug fixes, and is there
to support project developed with SF Click previously.

I don't think the Apache Click 2.0.x branch will add a lot of value,
because if you had a previous SF project, you would either stick to
the SF version or upgrade to the 2.x version to get new features.
There is little incentive to migrate an SF application to 2.0.x, go
through that work and then get no functional benefits.

This also make the choices much clearer to people. If they look at
Apache Click they just see the latest (2.x) version available, and
don't see 1.5.x, 2.0.x and 2.x and try and figure out which they
should use. In this vein, I think click.sourceforge.net should point
to a SF version of the Click documentation, but should include a
notice on the SF home page that this is a maintenance version, and
people should consider migrating to Apache Click to get the latest
features. This provides better support for SF users as they can see
the SF documentation on-line.


+1, I find all the versions on the Apache site confusing and having to backport fixes to multiple versions is a pain.


If we do smaller time box releases (2-3 months), with incremental
feature improvements these can be production releases and people can
continually upgrade. With more frequent releases we can publish more
announcements and generate more press.  If we has a regular release
schedule, people will also be more confident in the project's roadmap.
 With a more frequent production release strategy it will require care
to ensure upgrades are not disruptive.

I would like to get some feedback on this approach.


We can probably push out 1.5.2 from SF and start looking at releasing 2.1.0 once a new Calendar is in place.

regards

bob

Reply via email to