Hi guys, To clarify, do we go from e.g. 2.2.6 to 2.3.0, 2.3.6 or 2.3.7? It doesn't really matter but I just wanted to make sure I understand.
Some thoughts... Is the minor number just there to indicate to users that shiny new features have been added to ApacheDS? Does it give them a way to avoid those new features (i.e. if the user is only interested in bug fixes)? If bug fixes are only released for the latest minor version then the only way for users to get those bug fixes is to also get the latest new feature which might break backwards compatibility. If you are going to maintain a separate branch just for bug fixes is that just for the 0 minor version i.e. 2.0.X like it is now? So people who are on 2.1.X will have to upgrade to 2.2.X etc to keep up with the big fixes? When you release ApacheDS 3 do you abandon ApacheDS 2 so users must upgrade to take advantage of the latest bug fixes? I think it is very important for any changes that require the user to do something other than just upgrade be well labelled and avoidable without compromising the security or stability of the server. For that I think you need at least two main branches as you have now (1.0.X and 1.5.X), one for serious bug fixes and one for new backwards compatibility breaking functionality. The question is what to do with the other changes that don't break backwards compatibility and aren't security / stability fixes. Assuming we don't want to maintain more than 2 branches these changes need to be grouped with one of them. Apologies if that all came across a bit muddled or unfinished - gotta run! Martin
