--- On Wed, 5/13/09, Jörg Schaible <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Jörg Schaible <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [all] Rebooting commons projects
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Wednesday, May 13, 2009, 12:57 AM
> James Carman wrote at Mittwoch, 13.
> Mai 2009 04:30:
>
> > On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Dan Fabulich <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> If you feel like you'd want to call it "lang2" or
> "lang-ng" then just
> >> call it lang 2.0 or 3.0 or whatever and keep a
> lang-1.x branch around for
> >> stability fixes.
> >
> > I thought we agreed that we would "jump" major version
> numbers (as you
> > suggest here I think) whenever we are going to break
> backwards
> > compatibility (which would include "next generation"
> type changes).
> > Then, we would change the package name to match to
> avoid the "jar
> > hell" issue.
>
> +1
>
Add another voice to the pile saying that solutions other than a major version
number bump don't seem to scale.
-Matt
> > I don't like the "ng" stuff either. What's
> next? Commons Lang Deep
> > Space 9? :) Doesn't a new major version
> number imply "next
> > generation"?
>
> Hehehe ... reloaded? Fortunately we're forward bound,
> otherwise we would
> additionally talk about "origins" :))
>
> - Jörg
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
