> So what I am for is the following (example) (which does not re-use version
> numbers):
>
> So we have 3.2.12 (released as you currently do).
> New breaking API is encountered
> So you up the minor version - and create a "RC" release
> That version is 3.3.0-1  (the buildnumber is important)
> That fails due to some license not being present, so you release the next
> version
> 3.3.0-2
> ...
> 3.3.0-3
> ...
> 3.3.0-7
> This passes the vote and the announce about apache maven 3.3.0 available
> for download goes onto the website and links to 3.3.0-7
> After release some bugs are found,
> Next version is 3.3.1-nnn
>

This is exactly what I use for my corporate customers.
What is missing though is some nice Nexus staging rule to check that not
more than one release (buildnumber) for a specific version can be released
(promoted from staging) in Nexus. Would be nice to have to prevent mistakes
(which do happen in the real world).

/Anders


>
>
> What I am against is the following (which **also** does not re-use version
> numbers):
> So we have 3.2.12 (released as you currently do).
> New breaking API is encountered
> So you up the minor version - and create a "RC" release
> That version is 3.3.0
> That fails due to some license not being present, so you release the next
> version
> 3.3.1
> ...
> 3.3.3
> ...
> 3.3.7
> This passes the vote and the announce about apache maven 3.3.7 available
> for download goes onto the website (but there is no mention of 3.3.6 or any
> other prior 3.3.x)
>
> So I would not want to see (in "released version") 3.2.12 -> 3.3.7 ->
> 3.3.16 -> 3.4.7
>
> Hope that makes it clearer.
>
> /James
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to