Most of the time I override the Maven release plugin default ;) In a three-segment version (x.y.z), I tend to adopt the following scheme:
The x-segment, I use for major features and/or incompatible changes. Hence a lot of changes in uimaFIT had to wait for the upcoming 2.0.0 release. The y-segment, I use for normal feature releases. Depending on the project that may or may not include incompatible changes. For a rather stable project like uimaFIT, a y-segment increase should not include incompatible changes. The z-segment, I reserve for bugfix releases (stuff necessary between feature releases because of oversights, unexpected issues, etc.) A bugfix release should never include incompatible changes. It may fix incompatible changes accidentially introduced in a y-segment release. I think the 2.4.1 release definitely has a different quality than the bugfix 2.4.2 release. I've seen people add an extra digit in such cases (2.4.1.1). Artifactory versions had such cases in the past. But I don't know the rationale behind their 3-segment versions. It may be good to document a versioning guideline for UIMA somewhere. Cheers, -- Richard Am 01.08.2013 um 19:14 schrieb Marshall Schor <[email protected]>: > On 8/1/2013 12:29 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: >> Sounds good. >> >> I wonder about the UIMA versioning scheme. Since there is a three-part >> versioning scheme, I'd have expected that the last digit is reserved for >> bug-fix releases (like this one) and that the 2.5.0 may have been a >> better name for the 2.4.1 release. How does the UIMA versioning scheme work? > Here's my guess on how this works: > > People by default bump up the release number by .1 (actually, doing a mvn > release:prepare defaults to this). > > That's where it stays, unless someone gets motivated to change it to > something else. > > We typically haven't done big jumps (like raising the 2nd digit) unless there > are major changes. > > I do think that the 2.4.1 release had enough new stuff to merit the 2.5.0 > designation, but I don't think anyone focused on that. > > -Marshall > >> -- Richard >> >> Am 01.08.2013 um 17:22 schrieb Marshall Schor <[email protected]>: >> >>> I'm thinking it would best for the UIMA users if we were to do a 2.4.2 Java >>> SDK >>> release soon (in the next week or so?) to fix the 7 issues that popped up >>> when >>> we got the 2.4.1 SDK out into the community. >>> >>> WDYT? >>> >>> The issues: >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=fixVersion%20%3D%20%222.4.2SDK%22%20AND%20project%20%3D%20UIMA >>> >>> -Marshall
