On 11/18/11 4:30 PM, "Konstantin Shvachko" <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Doesn't having trunk on lesser version than a branch make Hadoop >versioning more confusing? IMO Trunk is named 'trunk', and has no version http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/hadoop/common/ Where is 0.24? nowhere (yet). There is only trunk and the branches. The pom files in maven may be confusing, since they claim that the code in the 'trunk' is 0.24.0-SNAPSHOT. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/hadoop/common/trunk/pom.xml?view=markup One should not have to commit to a branch name before branching from trunk! Just change the trunk pom project name to trunk-SNAPSHOT. When a branch occurs, it can be named with a version, and the pom's in the branch updated appropriately. This way, trunk's version never changes -- which is helpful after a branch for many IDE's that derive config from maven. It also allows consistency between svn paths and maven versions. OT: (the maven release plugin is restrictive and flawed IMO. It conflates naming with version control, only working well if you follow its default 'rename where you branched from' policy. Use 'mvn versions:set' and svn/git instead for branching). >People were asking for consistent non-confusing versioning schema. >Why don't we instead call a vote on your initial suggestion lately >clarified by Matt? >I got a feeling many are in favor of it. > >--Konstantin > >On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Arun C Murthy <a...@hortonworks.com> >wrote: >> Nope, just change the version number of releases off this branch. >> >> Trunk continues to be trunk. 0.23 or 0.24 etc. etc. whatever we choose >>to call them come off trunk. >> >> This is about one branch only. >> >> Arun >> >> On Nov 17, 2011, at 7:29 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote: >> >>> Let me repeat. By renaming ONLY 0.20.security to 1.0 >>> you are replacing Hadoop-trunk with this branch. >>> Is that the intention of the rename? >>> Are we switching to the security branch as the new trunk? >>> >>> --Konstantin >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Eric Yang <eric...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Owen O'Malley <o...@hortonworks.com> >>>>wrote: >>>>> +1 for release future 2xx releases as 1.x.y. >>>>> >>>>> I believe the right mapping is: >>>>> rename branch-0.20-security to branch-1 >>>>> copy branch-0.20-security-205 to branch-1.0 >>>>> >>>>> Then the 1.0.x releases will come off of the branch-1.0 and branch-1 >>>>>will >>>>> be the upcoming 1.1.x releases. >>>>> >>>>> -- Owen >>>>> >>>> >> >>
