On Monday, January 20, 2014, Karel Piwko <kpiwko(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 12:27:22 +0100
Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org <javascript:;>> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Karel Piwko
<kpiwko@redhat.com<javascript:;>>
wrote:
>
> > > +1 on postponing to a later point. If ready by April, should be fine
as
> > > well (my opinion). Bruno had a good point, that the postponed release
> > > should not stop us from releasing (unstable) snapshots for testing
> > reasons.
> > > I like that: Release often, release early.
> >
> > What is actually an (unstable) snapshot? Could you shed more light on
that?
> >
>
> I'd say a regular snapshot, from master branch, released to the snapshot
> repo
That's good until another project(s) will rely on it. You update snaphot
and
other projects will get broken without any option to avoid that. It would
be
much better to make snapshots stable in time, as I described in previous
email.
Well, this is all early and understood, not why thats a problem, when
DEVELOPING something...
>
>
> >
> > Namely, is the "snapshot" a set of micro/minor releases of Aerogear
> > projects?
> > Or do you plan to release every Aerogear project as -SNAPSHOT? Or
> > introducing
> > -milestone/.Mx/alpha/beta/cr/timestamp/any-qualifier-you-like into
version
> > strings?
> >
> > I don't think 2/ option is a good idea, especially if SNAPSHOTs are
> > released
> > early & often. That would be a maintenance/testing nightmare, if
various
> > SNAPSHOTs of the same project cannot be distinguished from each other
and
> > used
> > within other projects.
> >
> > Karel
> > _______________________________________________
> > aerogear-dev mailing list
> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <javascript:;>
> >
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> >
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <javascript:;>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
--
Sent from Gmail Mobile