Re: eclipse plugin version and release schedule?
On 9/18/05, Jacek Laskowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd vote for 0.5.0 if JIRA (or any other source) would be appropriately updated so that one could see what it really means. Of course, at the moment, 0.5.0 is as good to me as 0.7.5 or even 0.7.7.9 ;) +1
Re: eclipse plugin version and release schedule?
On Sep 16, 2005, at 10:55 AM, Sachin Patel wrote: To get some discussion going on release schedules... What version should we have the eclipse plugin at? Currently it stands at 1.0.0. To give you some background [SNIP] Thanks for the info. I'm rather baffled that eclipse doesn't have a way of marking something as -dev or such, as I think that's valuable... Anyway, maybe we just use 1.0 as a demark for that. That's actually not an unusual convention here at the ASF. So what does everyone prefer? (2) We bump down the current version to something like 0.5.0, and this version will be an official version to go out with Geronimo 1.0 and be based on one of the milestone driver's of WTP. This offical version will also be available through the update manager. +1 Based on this, we can decide what function we want in. For example if (2) is chosen, we just focus on stability with WTP M8/9, deployment scenarios, rather then development scenarios (editors, views etc). You're the guy with the clue here. :) geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: eclipse plugin version and release schedule?
Sachin Patel wrote: So what does everyone prefer? (1) We keep 1.0.0, and have our final driver with or after WTP hits 1.0 so our official version is based on the WTP 1.0 offical version. On this 1.0.0 release the update manager will be available as a primary means of installing this official version. -1 keeping the 1.0.0 version. It's a bit misleading. Historically, 1.0.0 is a means of declaring that a feature set is complete and moreover the team has agreed it really is. If you're satisfied with keeping in sync with WTP numbering, I'm fine with it, but the other question is whether or not the 1.0.0 is indeed ready. So, a question might strike a reader, what's the roadmap for 1.0.0? Is JIRA the definite source of what's coming? (2) We bump down the current version to something like 0.5.0, and this version will be an official version to go out with Geronimo 1.0 and be based on one of the milestone driver's of WTP. This offical version will also be available through the update manager. 0.5.0 - doesn't look good, either. It reminds me OpenEJB and Castor with the never-ending numbering where no one could decide what exactly should be the 1.0 version (fortunatelly, Dave cut the pre-1.0 version of OpenEJB, so it's drawing to its close ;)) I'd vote for 0.5.0 if JIRA (or any other source) would be appropriately updated so that one could see what it really means. Of course, at the moment, 0.5.0 is as good to me as 0.7.5 or even 0.7.7.9 ;) (3) Something else Since 1.0.0-dev is not possible, I'd go with 0.5.0 and update JIRA accordingly, so that the plugin won't fall into the trap of the never-ending 0.x.x.x numbering. Sachin Jacek
eclipse plugin version and release schedule?
To get some discussion going on release schedules... What version should we have the eclipse plugin at? Currently it stands at 1.0.0. To give you some background First off, Eclipse requires a pure version number, so we can't have 1.0.0-dev. If you go to any of the eclipse projects, you'll notice that after downloading a version, you cannot visually differentiate between a development version of a jar and its released version. Only by the actual download zip, are versions specified by including a date and build type in the zip. This is why on the download like I put the date in the link to indicate that it is a daily 1.0.0 development driver. Secondly, the update manager should be used to post official released versions and to move from one released version to another. To update with a daily version, you manually have to download the zip and extract it over the previous version. One other issue is do we want an official version for 1.0? The plugins WTP requirement won't have their 1.0 release until around December. So it will have to be based on a milestone driver of WTP. The WTP release schedule is as follows: M8-9/23 M9-11/18 1.0-by EOY So what does everyone prefer? (1) We keep 1.0.0, and have our final driver with or after WTP hits 1.0 so our official version is based on the WTP 1.0 offical version. On this 1.0.0 release the update manager will be available as a primary means of installing this official version. (2) We bump down the current version to something like 0.5.0, and this version will be an official version to go out with Geronimo 1.0 and be based on one of the milestone driver's of WTP. This offical version will also be available through the update manager. (3) Something else Based on this, we can decide what function we want in. For example if (2) is chosen, we just focus on stability with WTP M8/9, deployment scenarios, rather then development scenarios (editors, views etc). Thoughts??? Sachin
