Thanks for pointing us to that Cameron.
Cheers,
Andrew
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:31 AM, Cameron Braid came...@braid.com.au wrote:
JBoss use a naming scheme that sorts alphabetically, maybe it is worth
considering
http://www.jboss.org/jbossas/downloads/
Applied to the names in the original
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Cameron Braid came...@braid.com.au wrote:
JBoss use a naming scheme that sorts alphabetically, maybe it is worth
considering
http://www.jboss.org/jbossas/downloads/
Applied to the names in the original email
1) gwt-2.0.0-m1.zip
2) gwt-2.0.0-m2.zip
3)
Just for info, JBoss guys use to suffix releases with GA (General
Availability)hibernate-3.4.0.GA for example
2009/8/28 Andrew Bowers abow...@google.com
The current problem we are trying to solve is that it is hard to know which
build is a major release for those who aren't intimate.
For 1.6,
JBoss use a naming scheme that sorts alphabetically, maybe it is worth
considering
http://www.jboss.org/jbossas/downloads/
Applied to the names in the original email
1) gwt-2.0.0-m1.zip
2) gwt-2.0.0-m2.zip
3) gwt-2.0.0-rc1.zip
4) gwt-2.0.0.zip
They could be :
1) gwt-2.0.0-Beta1.zip (or could
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
Senator Blum,
Do you mean disturbing as in
1) revolting,
2) distressing, or
3) disordering?
Distressing, I think.
-- Example #1 --
Please sort the following two lists chronlogically as quickly as you can:
List 1:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Scott Blum sco...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
Senator Blum,
Do you mean disturbing as in
1) revolting,
2) distressing, or
3) disordering?
Distressing, I think.
-- Example #1 --
Please sort
fwiw, I've never found myself sorting GWT distros but I do find myself
wanting to uniquely identify them all the time. Why do you think people will
be so eager to ignore part of the label? I would actually be surprised if
any form of naming fixes the few incidences of the conversation you mention.
-- Example #1 --
Please sort the following two lists chronlogically as quickly as you can:
List 1: 1.6.2, 1.6.5, 1.6.0, 1.6.1
List 2: 2.0.0-rc2, 2.0.0-ms2, 2.0.0, 2.0.0-rc1
This should be trivial for anyone familiar with the concepts of
milestone and release candidate builds. Anyone not
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Kelly Norton knor...@google.com wrote:
fwiw, I've never found myself sorting GWT distros but I do find myself
wanting to uniquely identify them all the time. Why do you think people will
be so eager to ignore part of the label? I would actually be surprised if
Makes sense to me. So the first one will be gwt-2.0.0-m0, right?
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:40 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
Mostly, this writeup is aimed at people who have been working on GWT's own
build-related stuff, but if anyone else has objections, now would be a good
time
Exactly :-)
On Wednesday, August 12, 2009, Joel Webber j...@google.com wrote:
Makes sense to me. So the first one will be gwt-2.0.0-m0, right?
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:40 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
Mostly, this writeup is aimed at people who have been working on GWT's own
Duh, Kelly. Everybody knows that you always start counting at 1 when there's
a number immediately following a space or a non-digit and you start counting
at 0 when there's a number that immediately follows a period. It's such a
logical and obvious system that I thought the rules would be
This reminds me of a thread I saw recently on whether the value 1 in a
foo_percentage database column meant 100% or 0.01%.
And on topic, +1 for the new version names. Has anyone talked to the
maven crowd about this? They seem to usually have an opinion on naming
schemes.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009
I find the fact that 2.0.0 is now ambiguous to be disturbing, admiral.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:40 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
Mostly, this writeup is aimed at people who have been working on GWT's own
build-related stuff, but if anyone else has objections, now would be a good
Senator Blum,
Do you mean disturbing as in
1) revolting,
2) distressing, or
3) disordering?
It seems that mathematics has successfully survived similar notational
issues, such as the whole X vs. X' thing.
Willing to give it a chance?
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Scott Blum
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
Senator Blum,
Do you mean disturbing as in
1) revolting,
2) distressing, or
3) disordering?
It seems that mathematics has successfully survived similar notational
issues, such as the whole X vs. X' thing.
I dislike
The version update notification thing is admittedly a problem, and so it's
true we maybe would need to tweak that. Not changing code most certaily
wasn't the justification for the naming scheme I proposed (slap me the day I
let that be a reason to justify a lame approach).
Alternate proposals,
I'm by no means a maven expert, but I use it for my builds. Maven uses the
following version format:
major.minor.incremental-qualifier
qualifier can be anything like rc1 or mac, for example, the way the
gwt-dev-*.jars are placed in the repo is:
dependency
groupIdcom.google.gwt/groupid
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
The version update notification thing is admittedly a problem, and so it's
true we maybe would need to tweak that. Not changing code most certaily
wasn't the justification for the naming scheme I proposed (slap me the day I
19 matches
Mail list logo
