Say you put this as 1.0.1. A month from now there is a bug fix and an user don't want all the updates from 1.0.2 on his production env. What would call it? 1.0.1.1?
These releases are production ready and not beta. We can promote it to 2.0.0 when we decide we have a whole completion of desires features and beyond. I originally proposed 1.0.1 but I have to agree it gets confusing on calling these minor updates. > On Aug 13, 2015, at 13:03, Andy Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have to disagree. We haven't really done a real major release. This first > one was for ip clearance and we will be adding new functionality in every > release and we don't want to end up at 1.20 before we know it. To me 1.1 > will be the first release where we have some sort of feature parity with > activemq. > >> On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 16:49 Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> ok, we will do 1.1.0 (You convinced me.. through twitter actually ;) )... >> >> thinking again 1.0.1 makes it looks too minor... and there is a lot of >> work done on artemis for this release, thanks for all the >> contributions... It's really nice seeing great contributions here... >> thanks everybody. (I can't name them all) >> >> >> I would like to be the release manager for this release, but I won't >> be around next week, otherwise I would start the process sooner, so i >> will do it in 2 weeks possibly as a heads up. >> >> >> Meanwhile, it would be nice people trying out and give us feedback on >> two things from master: * >> - try out MQTT. There's a small example under ./examples/protocols/mqtt >> - look at our improved examples under ./examples (on both distro and >> source) >> >> >> * { >> # how to build master: >> git clone https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis.git artemis >> cd artemis >> mvn install >> cd >> artemis-distribution/target/apache-artemis-1.0.1-SNAPSHOT-bin/apache-artemis-1.0.1-SNAPSHOT/ >> >> # ^^ That is the distribution. >> } >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:53 AM, Claus Ibsen <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> I think 1.1.0 is better. >>> >>> Maybe here in the start where more new functions is added / ported >>> from AMQ 5.x then the upcoming releases are IMHO more fitted as new >>> minor releases, than patch releases. >>> >>> And then when Artemis has a great set of features in 1.x, then >>> dedicated patch releases could be done which are more careful selected >>> bug fixes etc. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:04 AM, Clebert Suconic >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I believe we should be ready for a release the end of this week, early >>>> next week. >>>> >>>> >>>> I was going to call it 1.0.1 since my original plan was to keep >>>> calilng these 1.0.1, 1.0.2, ... 1.0.n until the JIRAs on the release >>>> 1.1.0 were fixed. >>>> >>>> >>>> however since the addition of the first MQTT protocol, that makes it a >>>> new / major feature. I'm not sure we should call it 1.0.1 or 1.1.0 >>>> now. >>>> >>>> >>>> We have also fixed logs of bugs.. and I'm currently doing some work on >>>> examples (adding an openwire example and doing some work on open wire) >>>> >>>> >>>> There are a lot of fixes around openwire as well. >>>> >>>> Any ideas on the release name? >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Claus Ibsen >>> ----------------- >>> http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus >>> Camel in Action 2nd edition: http://www.manning.com/ibsen2 >> >> >> >> -- >> Clebert Suconic >>
