On 01/20/2015 03:37 PM, Justin Ross wrote:
http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Any-ETA-on-a-QPid-0-32-release-td7617054.html
Yes, the generally agreed goal is to move away from "0." for our now mature
components. I don't think any suggestion was made about Proton.
Most participants on that thread favored a YY.MM (Year, Month) scheme, so
that's where I started.
The main advantage I see from the year/month scheme is the ability to
relate different component versions to each other. E.g. 15.06 of
component X was released at the same time 15.06 of component y was, but
after 15.01 of component z and before 15.12 of component, um, a, lets say.
I.e. you really only get benefit out if this if it is used fairly
broadly across components that are released at different times.
While I see some advantage from this scheme, there are different
advantages for other schemes so I have no desire to impose this it.
However if there isn't sufficient agreement to use it more widely than
just the qpid-cpp and related bits, I'm not sure it has much advantage
(and it is definitely a bit unusual).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
