Saturday, December 31, 2016, 5:33:19 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > Just to level set. I don't think its fair to expect a special policy for a > single podling.
To be clear, I'm just asking a question, since there's no written policy regarding the Maven version number as far as I know. So I suppose the Incubator PMC is free to decide this for the individual release. Of course, I prefer to find out the feelings earlier than the release voting. Anyway, if there will be a written policy, then note that the situation is the same for any (Java-library-) poddling that was a widely used project before trying to join Apache. > On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 9:40 AM Daniel Dekany <ddek...@freemail.hu> wrote: > >> The original question in this thread is much less generic than in the >> linked one though, so it's certainly easier to answer. Just as a >> reminder, the specialities are these: >> >> - This project already have suffixless releases from before >> incubation, which are widely used. If the incubation fails, those >> versions won't be any better that the incubating ones. After all, ASF >> won't go around and delete those releases from the Maven Central, >> from SF.net, etc. >> >> - The project doesn't have an org.apache.* Maven groupId, nor a such >> Java package (in 2.x.x, because of backward compatibility, and we >> are talking about 2.x.x only here). So as far as I see it's quite >> unlikely that the user will see "Apache" without "incubating" >> because we have removed it from the *Maven* version number, at least >> if we change <name>Apache FreeMarker</name> in the POM to >> <name>Apache FreeMarker (incubating)</name>. >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> Daniel Dekany >> >> >> Saturday, December 31, 2016, 1:50:02 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote: >> >> > For reference, please read this thread from 2008: >> > >> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0b6c065a908c5f9ec39fa78c31b39c83a6fea29eb34fada0ee070413@1222432864@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E >> > >> > It has all the arguments for and against the -incubating versioning >> > label, and why the disclaimer exists. Warning: it is long (I haven't >> > even reached the conclusion after about an hour of reading). >> > >> > It goes of a bit about releasing through Maven, and some quibles with >> > central repository management and releases and other politics, but it >> > should be enlightening to see all positions. Read it with an open mind >> > and don't look only for the bits that support your position, but try >> > to understand the other side as well. >> > >> > Martijn >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Jacopo Cappellato >> > <jacopo.cappell...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Martijn Dashorst < >> >> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> [...] >> >>> Freemarker has been in incubation for 17 months. What do you need to >> >>> learn and do before you will start your graduation vote? >> >>> >> >> >> >> In my opinion the Freemarker project would be ready to successfully >> pass a >> >> graduation vote and a discussion thread is going on in the project's >> >> mailing list; based on how the conversation is going the community may >> >> decide to wait a few more weeks in order to try to attract some >> committers. >> >> However I think that the topic discussed in this thread (about the >> concern >> >> that the "-incubating" suffix may mislead the consumers about the >> stability >> >> of a software product) is a valid one; even if its output will not >> probably >> >> affect Freemarker (that could be a TLP by then). >> >> >> >> Jacopo >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> -- Thanks, Daniel Dekany --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
