<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Lucas Holmquist <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:lholmqui@redhat.com" target="_blank">lholmqui@redhat.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im"><br>
On Jun 13, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Bruno Oliveira &lt;<a href="mailto:bruno@abstractj.org">bruno@abstractj.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
<br>
&gt; Good morning all, today I was thinking about a problem that the other<br>
&gt; projects might face with.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Our versioning policy is pretty straightforward<br>
&gt; <a href="http://staging.aerogear.org/docs/reference/AeroGearVersioningPolicy/" target="_blank">http://staging.aerogear.org/docs/reference/AeroGearVersioningPolicy/</a> and<br>
&gt; to me makes sense. Here comes the problem, as you know<br>
&gt; aerogear-security-shiro was released and would be crazy to start with<br>
&gt; 1.0.x, for this reason I started with 0.1.0. Question:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; - Where 0.1.0 release should be into the roadmap?<br>
&gt; <a href="http://staging.aerogear.org/docs/planning/roadmaps/AeroGearSecurity/" target="_blank">http://staging.aerogear.org/docs/planning/roadmaps/AeroGearSecurity/</a><br>
<br>
</div>I think of aerogear-security-picketlink and aerogear-security-shiro as adapters to aerogear-security.<br>
<br>
So for the AeroGear Security roadmap, i would think the shiro &quot;adapter&quot; should go under 1.X.0 since it&#39;s a new feature<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div style>sounds reasonable </div><div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Might be confusing if we just add 0.1.0 into the roadmap.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; - How to properly file jiras?<br>
&gt; The correct would be 0.1.0 for jiras associated with<br>
&gt; aerogear-security-shiro, but might be very confusing for newcomers when<br>
&gt; they start to look at our roadmap.<br>
&gt;<br>
<br>
</div>I think for filling JIRA&#39;s, we might just want to stick with the umbrella aerogear-security numbers,  or else create a new sub projects for these<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>+1</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
&gt; - In the situation where you must bump the minor release, for example<br>
&gt; aerogear-security 1.0.2. What&#39;s the appropriate approach to follow?<br>
&gt; Create a new release on Jira and update the roadmap?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I&#39;m asking these questions because is impossible our components have the<br>
&gt; same version of the others with projects growth.<br>
&gt; --<br>
&gt; abstractj<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; _______________________________________________<br>
&gt; aerogear-dev mailing list<br>
&gt; <a href="mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org">aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
&gt; <a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
aerogear-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org">aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Matthias Wessendorf <br><br>blog: <a href="http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/</a><br>
sessions: <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf" target="_blank">http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf</a><br>twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/mwessendorf" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mwessendorf</a>
</div></div>