Hi AeroGear community, We have been using the digger-java client module in our product for the last couple of months. At this point I think the API is stable enough and I think we should release them. However, because at some point during the 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT version, we have introduced some broken changes (and our product is released using the version before the broken changes are made), we now need to do 2 releases; 1. Release 1.0.1 from this branch: https://github.com/ wei-lee/digger-java/tree/fix-for-3-18-release. This is before the broken change is introduced.

2. From master (1.0.2).

Apologies in advance for the manually version change. Matthias does point it out that it is not the right way to do it. So, can we publish those releases? Sorry for the problem we have caused, I promise it won't be like this the next time....

-- WEI LI SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 <https://red.ht/sig> _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Wei Li <weil(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Hi AeroGear community, > > We have been using the digger-java client module in our product for the > last couple of months. At this point I think the API is stable enough and I > think we should release them. > > However, because at some point during the 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT version, we have > introduced some broken changes (and our product is released using the > version before the broken changes are made), we now need to do 2 releases; > > 1. Release 1.0.1 from this branch: https://github.com/wei > -lee/digger-java/tree/fix-for-3-18-release. This is before the broken > change is introduced. > we can release this, let's make a branch, with a more reasonable name, available on upstream > 2. From master (1.0.2). > ok So, why do we need an old release? Not sure I really get that. > > Apologies in advance for the manually version change. Matthias does point > it out that it is not the right way to do it. > > So, can we publish those releases? Sorry for the problem we have caused, > I promise it won't be like this the next time.... > there are no big problems. I'd suggest we simply continue to follow a normal java release process, as discussed here and avoid manual bumps.

Also, it never hurts to release bits to the community very often (release early, release often). This likely avoids issues like the above -M > > > -- > > WEI LI > > SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER > > Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> > > weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 > <https://red.ht/sig> > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Wei Li <weil(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Hi AeroGear community, > > We have been using the digger-java client module in our product for the > last couple of months. At this point I think the API is stable enough and I > think we should release them. > > However, because at some point during the 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT version, we have > introduced some broken changes (and our product is released using the > version before the broken changes are made), we now need to do 2 releases; > > 1. Release 1.0.1 from this branch: https://github.com/wei > -lee/digger-java/tree/fix-for-3-18-release. This is before the broken > change is introduced. > we can release this, let's make a branch, with a more reasonable name, available on upstream > 2. From master (1.0.2). > ok So, why do we need an old release? Not sure I really get that.

> > Apologies in advance for the manually version change. Matthias does point > it out that it is not the right way to do it. > > So, can we publish those releases? Sorry for the problem we have caused, > I promise it won't be like this the next time.... > there are no big problems. I'd suggest we simply continue to follow a normal java release process, as discussed here and avoid manual bumps. Also, it never hurts to release bits to the community very often (release early, release often). This likely avoids issues like the above -M > > > -- > > WEI LI > > SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER > > Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> > > weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 > <https://red.ht/sig> > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

I have create the release-1.0.1 branch: https://github.com/ aerogear/digger-java/tree/release-1.0.1. We can do the release from there. On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Wei Li <weil(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> Hi AeroGear community, >> >> We have been using the digger-java client module in our product for the >> last couple of months. At this point I think the API is stable enough and I >> think we should release them. >> >> However, because at some point during the 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT version, we >> have introduced some broken changes (and our product is released using the >> version before the broken changes are made), we now need to do 2 releases; >> >> 1. Release 1.0.1 from this branch: https://github.com/wei >> -lee/digger-java/tree/fix-for-3-18-release. This is before the broken >> change is introduced. >> > > we can release this, let's make a branch, with a more reasonable name, > available on upstream > > >> 2. From master (1.0.2). >> > > ok > > So, why do we need an old release? Not sure I really get that. > The problem is that 1.0.2 is not backward compatible with 1.0.1. We have a release branch that needs to built with 1.0.1, but master needs to be built with 1.0.2.

> > >> >> Apologies in advance for the manually version change. Matthias does >> point it out that it is not the right way to do it. >> >> So, can we publish those releases? Sorry for the problem we have caused, >> I promise it won't be like this the next time.... >> > > there are no big problems. I'd suggest we simply continue to follow a > normal java release process, as discussed here and avoid manual bumps. > > Also, it never hurts to release bits to the community very often (release > early, release often). This likely avoids issues like the above > > -M > >> >> >> -- >> >> WEI LI >> >> SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER >> >> Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> >> >> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 >> <https://red.ht/sig> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- WEI LI SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 <https://red.ht/sig> _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Wei Li <weil(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > I have create the release-1.0.1 branch: https://github.com/aer > ogear/digger-java/tree/release-1.0.1. We can do the release from there. > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; > wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Wei Li <weil(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> Hi AeroGear community, >>> >>> We have been using the digger-java client module in our product for the >>> last couple of months. At this point I think the API is stable enough and I >>> think we should release them. >>> >>> However, because at some point during the 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT version, we >>> have introduced some broken changes (and our product is released using the >>> version before the broken changes are made), we now need to do 2 releases; >>> >>> 1. Release 1.0.1 from this branch: https://github.com/wei >>> -lee/digger-java/tree/fix-for-3-18-release. This is before the broken >>> change is introduced. >>> >> >> we can release this, let's make a branch, with a more reasonable name, >> available on upstream >> >> >>> 2. From master (1.0.2). >>> >> >> ok >> >> So, why do we need an old release? Not sure I really get that. >> > > The problem is that 1.0.2 is not backward compatible with 1.0.1. We have > a release branch that needs to built with 1.0.1, but master needs to be > built with 1.0.2. > to follow semVer, let's name it 1.1.0 - instead of 1.0.2 since it's not backwards compatible

> > > >> >> >>> >>> Apologies in advance for the manually version change. Matthias does >>> point it out that it is not the right way to do it. >>> >>> So, can we publish those releases? Sorry for the problem we have >>> caused, I promise it won't be like this the next time.... >>> >> >> there are no big problems. I'd suggest we simply continue to follow a >> normal java release process, as discussed here and avoid manual bumps. >> >> Also, it never hurts to release bits to the community very often >> (release early, release often). This likely avoids issues like the above >> >> -M >> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> WEI LI >>> >>> SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER >>> >>> Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> >>> >>> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 >>> <https://red.ht/sig> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > > -- > > WEI LI > > SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER > > Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> > > weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 > <https://red.ht/sig> > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Sure, let's do that. On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Karel Piwko <kpiwko(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; > wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Wei Li <weil(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> I have create the release-1.0.1 branch: https://github.com/aer >>> ogear/digger-java/tree/release-1.0.1. We can do the release from there. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Wei Li <weil(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi AeroGear community, >>>>> >>>>> We have been using the digger-java client module in our product for >>>>> the last couple of months. At this point I think the API is stable enough >>>>> and I think we should release them. >>>>> >>>>> However, because at some point during the 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT version, we >>>>> have introduced some broken changes (and our product is released using the >>>>> version before the broken changes are made), we now need to do 2 releases; >>>>> >>>>> 1. Release 1.0.1 from this branch: https://github.com/wei >>>>> -lee/digger-java/tree/fix-for-3-18-release. This is before the >>>>> broken change is introduced. >>>>> >>>> >>>> we can release this, let's make a branch, with a more reasonable name, >>>> available on upstream >>>> >>>> >>>>> 2. From master (1.0.2). >>>>> >>>> >>>> ok >>>> >>>> So, why do we need an old release? Not sure I really get that. >>>> >>> >>> The problem is that 1.0.2 is not backward compatible with 1.0.1. We >>> have a release branch that needs to built with 1.0.1, but master needs to >>> be built with 1.0.2. >>> >> >> to follow semVer, let's name it 1.1.0 - instead of 1.0.2 since it's not >> backwards compatible >> > > +1, exactly my point :-) > >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Apologies in advance for the manually version change. Matthias does >>>>> point it out that it is not the right way to do it. >>>>> >>>>> So, can we publish those releases? Sorry for the problem we have >>>>> caused, I promise it won't be like this the next time.... >>>>> >>>> >>>> there are no big problems. I'd suggest we simply continue to follow a >>>> normal java release process, as discussed here and avoid manual bumps. >>>> >>>> Also, it never hurts to release bits to the community very often >>>> (release early, release often). This likely avoids issues like the above >>>> >>>> -M >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> WEI LI >>>>> >>>>> SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER >>>>> >>>>> Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> >>>>> >>>>> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 >>>>> <https://red.ht/sig> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matthias Wessendorf >>>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> WEI LI >>> >>> SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER >>> >>> Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> >>> >>> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 >>> <https://red.ht/sig> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > > -- > > KAREL PIWKO > > MANAGER, MOBILE QE > > Red Hat Czech Republic <https://www.redhat.com/> > > Purkyňova 647/111 > > 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic > > kpiwko(a)redhat.com IM: kpiwko > <https://red.ht/sig> > TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted> > @redhatway <https://twitter.com/redhatway> @redhatinc > <https://instagram.com/redhatinc> @redhatsnaps > <https://snapchat.com/add/redhatsnaps> > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- WEI LI SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 <https://red.ht/sig> _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Great. Thanks Matthias. On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > Hello, > > I've pushed 1.1.0 (master) and 1.0.1 JARs over to maven central > > They should be online tomorrow .... > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Wei Li <weil(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> Sure, let's do that. >> >> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Karel Piwko <kpiwko(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Wei Li <weil(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have create the release-1.0.1 branch: https://github.com/aer >>>>> ogear/digger-java/tree/release-1.0.1. We can do the release from >>>>> there. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Matthias Wessendorf < >>>>> matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Wei Li <weil(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi AeroGear community, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We have been using the digger-java client module in our product for >>>>>>> the last couple of months. At this point I think the API is stable enough >>>>>>> and I think we should release them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, because at some point during the 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT version, >>>>>>> we have introduced some broken changes (and our product is released using >>>>>>> the version before the broken changes are made), we now need to do 2 >>>>>>> releases; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Release 1.0.1 from this branch: https://github.com/wei >>>>>>> -lee/digger-java/tree/fix-for-3-18-release. This is before the >>>>>>> broken change is introduced. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> we can release this, let's make a branch, with a more reasonable >>>>>> name, available on upstream >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. From master (1.0.2). >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ok >>>>>> >>>>>> So, why do we need an old release? Not sure I really get that. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The problem is that 1.0.2 is not backward compatible with 1.0.1. We >>>>> have a release branch that needs to built with 1.0.1, but master needs to >>>>> be built with 1.0.2. >>>>> >>>> >>>> to follow semVer, let's name it 1.1.0 - instead of 1.0.2 since it's >>>> not backwards compatible >>>> >>> >>> +1, exactly my point :-) >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Apologies in advance for the manually version change. Matthias does >>>>>>> point it out that it is not the right way to do it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, can we publish those releases? Sorry for the problem we have >>>>>>> caused, I promise it won't be like this the next time.... >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> there are no big problems. I'd suggest we simply continue to follow >>>>>> a normal java release process, as discussed here and avoid manual bumps. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, it never hurts to release bits to the community very often >>>>>> (release early, release often). This likely avoids issues like the above >>>>>> >>>>>> -M >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> WEI LI >>>>>>> >>>>>>> SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 >>>>>>> <https://red.ht/sig> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf >>>>>> >>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> WEI LI >>>>> >>>>> SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER >>>>> >>>>> Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> >>>>> >>>>> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 >>>>> <https://red.ht/sig> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matthias Wessendorf >>>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> KAREL PIWKO >>> >>> MANAGER, MOBILE QE >>> >>> Red Hat Czech Republic <https://www.redhat.com/> >>> >>> Purkyňova 647/111 >>> >>> 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic >>> >>> kpiwko(a)redhat.com IM: kpiwko >>> <https://red.ht/sig> >>> TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted> >>> @redhatway <https://twitter.com/redhatway> @redhatinc >>> <https://instagram.com/redhatinc> @redhatsnaps >>> <https://snapchat.com/add/redhatsnaps> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> WEI LI >> >> SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER >> >> Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> >> >> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 >> <https://red.ht/sig> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- WEI LI SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/> weil(a)redhat.com M: +353862393272 <https://red.ht/sig> _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev