[jboss-dev] Re: jgroups version names

[Brian Stansberry]

Note that this needs to be applied to the JGroups pom.xml as well; i.e. 
if a binary gets uploaded to repository.jboss.org/jgroups/x.y.z.GA the 
version tag in the pom should say x.y.z.GA as well.  That way we won't 
have hassles when the AS shifts to pulling stuff from the maven repo.

Bela Ban wrote:
> Thanks for addressing my other concerns :-)
> 
> Sure, I'll do that from now on
> 
> Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
>> I think the existing internal versioning scheme of jgroups is fine, 
>> I'm just asking for consistency when putting the binaries in the 
>> repositories, e.g.
>>
>> X.Y.Z.Beta1
>> X.Y.Z.Beta2
>> X.Y.Z.CR1
>> X.Y.Z.CR2
>> X.Y.Z.CR3
>> X.Y.Z.CR4
>> X.Y.Z.GA
>> X.Y.Z.SP1
>> X.Y.Z.SP2
>>
>> Bela Ban wrote:
>>> Okay, well some releases are adhering to this standard... :-)
>>>
>>> I didn't care much for this because it is stupid. Relying on strings 
>>> for version comparison is terrible, as we have to parse the strings 
>>> into component parts (numbers) anyway. Plus we end up with kludges 
>>> like changing RC1 to CR1 so alphabetical ordering still works ...
>>>
>>> A much better way, and that's what I thought we had adopted, is the 
>>> scheme suggested by Scott in 
>>> http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=77231. This 
>>> allows us to use shorts for major, minor and patch versions, and 
>>> comparisons become simple.
>>>
>>> Note that we don't care about comparisons between 2.6.2.CR1 and 
>>> 2.6.2.GA, because the scheme suggested by Scott doesn't care about 
>>> the qualifier. These 2 versions are both the same the point of the 
>>> version number.
>>>
>>> Having said that, if this cannot convince you, I can adhere to the 
>>> version numbering scheme, that's not an issue for me, as the 
>>> underlying version stays the same, it is just the strig that changes
>>>
>>>
>>> Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
>>>> - You're missing some '.GA' suffixes (e.g. 2.5.2 in both repos, 
>>>> 2.6.2 maven only)
>>>> - Some versions appear both with & without the '.GA' suffix (e.g. 
>>>> latest 2.6.2 in the legacy repo)
>>>> - In some cases using '-' instead of '.' (e.g. 2.5.0-GA, maven repo)
>>>>
>>>> Am I missing something?
>>>
> 

-- 
Brian Stansberry
Lead, AS Clustering
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
brian.stansberry at redhat.com