It seems that it would be the consensus. We need to update the release guide to reflect that I think.
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 22:42, Andreas Pieber <[email protected]> wrote: > ok, what's the result? :) Go back to the more natural style: > > 1.0-SNAPSHOT -> 1.0 -> 1.1-SNAPSHOT -> 1.1 ...? > > kind regards, > andreas > > On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 08:09:36AM +0100, Andreas Pieber wrote: >> Hey, >> >> We've decided some time ago now to step from one version to the other and not >> jumping releases in between like felix does. Therefore we use quite "strange" >> snapshot versions (e.g. 2.99.99-SNAPSHOT for 3.0.0 or 2.1.99-SNAPSHOT for >> 2.2.0). But on the 2.1.x branch we use 2.1.4-SNPASHOT for 2.1.4. Well, I >> think >> something is wrong here :) >> >> IMHO we can either use 2.1.3.99-SNAPSHOT for 2.1.4 or simply switch back at >> 2.0.99-SNAPSHOT after releasing; in other words we have two options: >> >> 2.1.3.99-SNAP -> 2.1.4 -> 2.1.4.99-SNAP -> 2.1.5 >> 2.0.99-SNAP -> 2.1.4 -> 2.0.99-SNAP -> 2.1.5 >> >> I slightly prefer the first method since it maps the versions we choose for >> all >> other snapshots but basically I'm indifferent :) >> >> WDYT? >> >> kind regards, >> andreas >> > > > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
