[jbosstools-dev] change to have build_alias in front

[Nick Boldt]

Well, there's always the option of having the timestamp PRECEDE the 
alias, like for the last 2 releases. :) That way it's up to the user to 
decide if they want to upgrade from 1.2.3.v20120824-1234-M2 to the next 
dev milestone 1.2.3.v20120924-2345-Beta1 or stick to nightlies.

By switching to alias-first, you force a preferred sequence on the user 
and remove the option for that user to select which upgrade path they 
want -- to the stable branch or to the next trunk nightly.

---

But by starting with a timestamp, as long as the update was built after 
the current, you can select that as an upgrade path (or pick an older 
newer build). Then you can call the milestone whatever you want, be it 
M1 or Alpha1. (This is why I pushed for this convention in the first place.)

---

There's also the option of adopting Eclipse's Itimestamp (integration 
build) or Mtimestamp (maintenance build) and vtimestamp (release build) 
convention. This is how projects like Mylyn, for example, handle weekly 
builds (I lead up to a .0 release, M lead up to .1 and .2 releases) vs. 
their final/GA release builds, since I and M are always "older" 
ASCII-wise than v, and M is always "newer" than I so a maintenance build 
will trump a pre-GA build.

Nick

On 08/23/2012 11:26 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>>
>>>>> I did not say *remove* the date, I said it should not be the significant decider for p2.
>>>>>
>>>>> i.e. Release of a version should make any nightly/snapshot builds of that version invalid; today it does not because the data comes *before* the release type flag.
>>>>>
>>>>> proper versioning that has semantic API meaning instead of just rely on what date the build was made.
>>>> In trunk it is now uses release type in front of the date. It was fixed a month ago and works fine since.
>>>> I uses '${BUILD_ALIAS}-v'yyyyMMdd-HHmm' for local builds and '${BUILD_ALIAS}-v'yyyyMMdd-HHmm'-H${BUILD_NUMBER}' for hudson
>>> Oh - nice; that is news to me! Didn't see any notification on this ? Shouldn't we get that out since this changes things for QE/testers/bleeding edge installs
>>> and bumping versions becomes that more important.
>> We probably should, but I believe it is fine, because changed components should bump the version and it means bumped version in X.X.X.M1_vXXXXXXXX-XXXX-HXXX format should be higher than version in old format X.X.X.vXXXXXXXX-XXXX-HXXX-M1.
>
> okey - but M1 is higher than Beta1 afaics so this is not clean as it stands.
>
> Do we need to move to use Alpha's instead ? .... not too fond of that because milestone is more neutral but don't see many other options ?
>
> /max
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbosstools-dev mailing list
> jbosstools-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
>

-- 
Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat
Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio
http://nick.divbyzero.com