On Mar 20, 2013, at 11:16 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > Hi Alan, > > [..snip..] >> >> If I understand correctly your goal here is not a release (at least not >> yet), but rather to produce shared snapshots for people. If that's >> correct, then putting it on people.apache.org and calling it something >> that doesn't have RC in the name is fine. In Apache speak RC means >> something people are going to vote on to release. Just call it >> knox-0.2.0-SNAPSHOT. That's what I've seen most projects do for their >> maven nightly uploads. > > Can you name such projects? They're probably not doing the (socially) > right thing, but infra@ just hasn't caught them yet. > > If you don't want to name them (based on that) that's cool too ;) > > But yeah, putting things we don't intend to release at Apache on > people.a.o is not really best practice since arguably people.a.o > isn't there to share files, especially non authoritative releases that > could be considered releases (or RCs) by their place and name.
I think we have some confusion here. I was not saying that any projects I know of post nightly snapshots on people.apache.org, nor was I suggesting that be done in Knox on a regular basis. Kevin had something he wanted to share right now and since the infrastructure wasn't there it seemed like the best place to do it. What I was saying about other projects was how they name their nightly snapshots, which is <project_name>-<anticipated_next_version>-SNAPSHOT. All the projects I am involved in (Pig, Hive, HCatalog) upload their nightly snapshots to maven, which Knox may also want to do at some point in the future. > >> >> >>> >>> 3. v0.1.0 and v0.2.0-rc1 >>> >>> We had all of our history from the GitHub repository imported into the >>> Apache Git repo where we have continued working. Therefore there are >>> existing tags for the v0.1.0 and v0.2.0-rc1 so I thought it made the >>> most sense to continue on. I do acknowledge in hindsight that this is >>> something that should have been discussed. >> >> Version numbers don't matter and the first release of Knox can certainly >> be 0.2 if that fits with where the code's at. > > True, but it should be discussed. Those who are doing the work will > inevitably, decide. Agreed. > > Cheers, > Chris > Alan.
