Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop >> mail # dev >> Branch 2 release names


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Branch 2 release names

+1 for moving on with 2.0 till it gets GA'ed, given we haven't made much progress on 2.0.1-alpha.

+1 for putting the alpha/beta tags only on releases, and not on branches.

This also reduces some branch-clutter like I mentioned on the other thread on general@h.a.o.

Thanks,
+Vinod

On Sep 4, 2012, at 11:55 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote:

> While cleaning up the subversion branches, I thought more about the
> branch 2 release names. I'm concerned if we backtrack and reuse
> release numbers it will be extremely confusing to users. It also
> creates problems for tools like Maven that parse version numbers and
> expect a left to right release numbering scheme (eg. 2.1.1-alpha >
> 2.1.0). It also seems better to keep on the 2.0.x minor release until
> after we get a GA release off of the 2.0 branch.
>
> Therefore, I'd like to propose:
> 1. rename branch-2.0.1-alpha -> branch-2.0
> 2. delete branch-2.1.0-alpha
> 3. stabilizing goes into branch-2.0 until it gets to GA
> 4. features go into branch-2 and will be branched into branch-2.1 later
> 5. The release tags can have the alpha/beta tags on them.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -- Owen

NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB