I agree that 1.0 would give the wrong message. Some <1.0 version is
right.

Upayavira

On Thu, May 30, 2013, at 08:49 PM, Ali Lown wrote:
> >> Blockers:
> >> What version number should this be? The code is making reference to
> >> waveinabox 0.3. (Was 0.1, 0.2 ever released?). If we use 0.4 as our
> >> first Apache Release does this seem sensible? (To avoid the problems
> >> of ending up with repeated numbers in a few releases time).
> >>
> >
> > Does it make sense to use semantic versioning, e.g. start with v1.0.0 and
> > then increase numbers apropriately? (following http://semver.org/ guideline)
> > I wouldn't be afraid to call this v1.0, it may even be beneficial if that
> > atracts people to the project, which is precisely what we need the most IMO.
> 
> A 1.0 is normally assumed to be quite stable. (In my experience, Wave
> is still not there yet), hence I think 0.4 (being > 0.3 to prevent
> confusion), but <1.0 is a reasonable starting point for the Apache
> releases.
> 
> Unless I hear a preference from _the other committers/PMC_ within the
> next 24h, I will go ahead and branch, make changelogs, release-notes
> and tag.
> 
> @Michael: Once tagged tomorrow, am I definitely leaving it to you to
> compile+sign+post vote emails? I think it would be best to keep this
> fast pace going and have the vote mails sent by (at latest) next
> Wednesday. (Given we seem to have lots of discussion of where to go
> after this release). Is that ok with you?
> 
> Ali

Reply via email to