Thanks Roman. Seems that ASF may have slightly different convention than what Spring has been using. Therefore, for the Geode community, we have a few options to consider:
(a) Use M1, M2..., drop RC# (per Roman) and still have RELEASE suffix for the final version - each of the milestone and release will have RCs appended during the voting process. Example: > 1.0.0-incubating.M1 -> 1.0.0-incubating.M1.RC# (during voting) -> > 1.0.0-incubating.M1 (at release) ... > 1.0.0-incubating.RELEASE -> 1.0.0-incubating.RELEASE.RC# (during voting) -> > 1.0.0.incubating.RELEASE (at release) I do see Roman's point of 'RELEASE' tag making it confusing during the voting process. (b) Similar to (a) but mark the final version as the final milestone 'MF' or simply have no suffix. Example: > 1.0.0-incubating.M1 -> 1.0.0-incubating.M1.RC# (during voting) -> > 1.0.0-incubating.M1 (at release) ... > 1.0.0-incubating.MF -> 1.0.0-incubating.MF.RC# (during voting) -> > 1.0.0.incubating.MF (at release) OR > 1.0.0-incubating -> 1.0.0-incubating.RC# (during voting) -> 1.0.0.incubating > (at release) Any further thoughts/ preference? This doesn't affect the first release (M1) but does affect our overall versioning approach. - Nitin ________________________________________ From: shaposh...@gmail.com <shaposh...@gmail.com> on behalf of Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 11:23 AM To: dev@geode.incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: A few recommendations on how to produce our first RC On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Nitin Lamba <ni...@ampool.io> wrote: > Thanks Roman, > > As per the earlier thread (subject: releaseType?) and Spring conventions, > it seems that these milestone releases 'M#' come before release candidates > 'RC#' and not together M#.RC#. So the expected release progression is: Ok, I went by the answer to the question I asked a few days ago of whether .M1 artifacts are expected to be published to a non-SNAPSHOT Maven repo. The answer was yes. From ASF perspective this qualifies as a 'release'. The fact that you include a certain designation (M1, M2, etc.) in the version string is totally up to you. This still doesn't change the fact that you're releasing the artifacts to the general public. Now, as part of your release process you *have* to vote on the artifacts that are going to be released. When you put an artifact for a vote you have to call it something. Typically in ASF that something is a release candidate (RC). This is precisely where having an actual *release* with a version string containing RC gets to be super confusing and thus I would recommend against using the following for actual releases intended for general public consumption: > 1.0.0-incubating.RC1 > 1.0.0-incubating.RC2 Thanks, Roman.
