tbh I don't like the approach to skip versions. IMHO a higher version number should present more stability and you simply assume that a X.X.1 is more stable than a X.X.0 release and not that the X.X.1 release actually is the X.X.0 release... Sry, but this sounds wrong somehow :)
kind regards, andreas On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 09:11:42PM +1300, Mark Derricutt wrote: > We've gotten into the habit of NEVER having .0 releases EVER. > > i.e. we always start with 2.0.1-SNAPSHOT, or 1.3.4.1-SNAPSHOT. This way a > range of [2.0,3.0) works nicely. > > -- > "Great artists are extremely selfish and arrogant things" — Steven Wilson, > Porcupine Tree > > On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> wrote: > > > In OSGi, 2.2-SNAPSHOT > 2.2.0, so it can cause artifacts to be badly > > wired against the snapshot instead of the release. So you can't > > really deploy snapshots and releases at the same time. > > On the other hand, it you build an artifact that import > >
pgpRDm25zqry6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
