8:38 a.m.
Hi,
the time has come to merge the "future" branch of inventory to its master so
that we don't prolong the schizophrenic situation of the component.
Because that merge will break the REST API, we need to sort out the recent
discussion about how to handle the breaking changes in the builds.
There were 2 proposals:
[ ] adopt 0.x.y versioning or some such so that we can actually increase a
version with breaking changes *, or
[ ] release timed snapshots and depend on them rather then simple -SNAPSHOT.
Please vote or propose other solutions so that we can move forward and not
piss off whole nations..
Cheers,
Lukas
* semver allows 0.x to do breaking changes without increasing the major
version, because leading zero means "before the first stable release"
11:31 a.m.
Hello,
It is not so much of a vote but an example of what Hawkular Metrics has been doing. The
project has been released on 0.x.y version under RHQ Metrics name and will continue to get
released under the same version scheme under the Hawkular organization. But Metrics is a
little bit atypical because we had official releases along the way and will keep
releasing. If you plan on getting community releases then it might be a good idea to use
0.x.y until the API is stable and the project matures.
Thank you,
Stefan
----- Original Message -----
3:56 p.m.
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 12:31:22 Stefan Negrea wrote:
I think it is a reasonable thing to do also in a multi-module project. The
releases don't even need to be "official" - it's just an acknowledgment
of
progress with the realization that the rest of the modules might not have
adapted to that progress yet.
IMHO, going 0.x.y makes most sense for all components, not just metrics. This
is supported by looking for example at Artificer, that had a great number of
0.x releases (called S-RAMP then) before it reached today's 1.0.0.Alpha1. That
milestone is significant and means that it has all the features deemed for
1.0.0 and is ready for stabilization phase. All Hawk components are far from
that stage.
6:18 p.m.
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 16:05:27 mike thompson wrote:
Well, actually this was my plan. We're out of master for more than a month
with great deal of features missing on any integration opportunities with the
rest of the components because of the simple fact that we don't want to break
other people's work. There's always going to be an Alpha, Beta or GA coming
and the longer we wait with integrating the bigger a "bomb" it is going to be.
If the breaking changes are released in a different version than what the MVP
components are using, then there's really no reason to not merge.
But I was thinking that we should actually incorporate the "true" inventory
code into MVP proper and do it now. Otherwise it will never get there, IMHO.
If Jirka lent his skillful Angular hand would that still not be possible?
3:01 a.m.
On 03/13/2015 12:26 AM, mike thompson wrote:
I talked to Lukas prior to the email, I would like to see it integrated,
but said that this would have to be merged once that works and not
affect the UI team. For the UI effort to use the new API, this should be
purely on Lukas/Jirka.
That means Lukas and Jirka work in a branch (rebase often) until this
works properly and then merge. (If it doesn't "work fine" on time we
won't merge for this milestone).
Thomas
3655
days inactive
3656
days old
7 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Jiri Kremser -
Lukas Krejci -
mike thompson -
Stefan Negrea -
Thomas Heute