Slava Imeshev
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.viewtier.com
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Benedict" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: iBATIS for Java 2.3.0 General Availability
> Well thanks for listening at least. I suppose it is equal on
e I can think
of is
Linux's package names.
Just my two cents.
Regards,
Slava Imeshev
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.viewtier.com
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Benedict" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: iBATIS for Java 2.3.0
Well thanks for listening at least. I suppose it is equal one way or
another. Perhaps I will learn something from this :-)
Clinton Begin wrote:
>> I am not aware of any other project at Apache that
>> includes a build number as part of their version number.
So let's teach them something toget
I am not aware of any other project at Apache that
includes a build number as part of their version number.
So let's teach them something together.
Clinton
On 2/17/07, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Clinton,
I understand the argument, but I am not aware of any other project at
Ap
On 2/17/07, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I understand the argument, but I am not aware of any other project at
Apache that includes a build number as part of their version number.
That doesn't mean you're the only one, but I think it's a minority
practice. And if it is a minority prac
Clinton,
I understand the argument, but I am not aware of any other project at
Apache that includes a build number as part of their version number.
That doesn't mean you're the only one, but I think it's a minority
practice. And if it is a minority practice, there must be a good reason
to not
Yes, I agree. We can either tag it with the arbitrary build number (what
most projects do), or pull the rev number from SVN (almost impossible to
fake).
The reason most projects go with the tag approach is that it keeps a running
history of all successful builds that you can then just pluck out
I talked to larry and he floated his idea on this. My main thought about the
build number was that it has to tie meaningfully back to the source state.
Larry's idea does that perfectly... rawk.
Thanks,
Brandon
On 2/17/07, Brandon Goodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is very interesting and I
This is very interesting and I'd like to know more about why this number is
important apart from other things like a
major.minor.revision.timestampformat. I'm not really picking up the
importance from the previous comments.
Here is my understanding, help me to clear the fog out... The serial is us
Paul,
I disagree entirely.
Open any product on your PC today, Java IDE, Visual Studio...anything. It
will have a build number. Not just software really, any and every product
on the planet has a serial number. They are useful for uniquely identifying
something. The major.minor.bug release ver
I am responding on the dev list too :-) There's two things going on:
1) An automated build numbering -- and any build numbering for that
matter -- isn't needed for official distributions. All you need is the
X.Y.Z scheme where X=major,Y=minor,Z=revision versions.
2) You are actually using the
The votes are in an iBATIS for Java version 2.3.0 is declared to be Apache
general availability status.
This release is the first release that does not include the DAO framework.
The DAO framework is available as a separate download on the Java downloads
page, but we recommend migrating to Spring
12 matches
Mail list logo
