[jcifs] 1.0, 2.0 or devel ?

Frode E. Moe frode at CoreTrek.no
Mon Sep 6 06:54:30 GMT 2004

On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 19:12:44 -0400, Michael B Allen wrote:
> I'm going to release "1.0.0". No different from 0.9.8 other than maybe a
> few package cleanups. But the point is to be able to make a branch that
> can be modified heavily while 1.0 only gets critical fixes.
> So the question is do we release jcifs-devel-x.x.x or jcifs-2.0.0 or what?
> Is there a standard procedure that's popular?
> Oddly enough outside of jCIFS I don't actually do enough Java programming
> to know what the normal behavior is when it comes to major releases. Maybe
> we should just release jcifs-0.10.0 but create lots of marketing spin
> calling it jcifs2 :-)

Yeah, how about calling it "jcifs 2 v1.5" internally, but "jcifs 2 v5.0"
in the "marketing department" ;)

Seriously though, how about adopting the scheme used at jakarta; seeing
as jcifs already has a "compatible" version numbering style

Here's some more info.

So I guess whether to call the next release 1.1.x or 2.0.x all depends
on how extensive any planned changes are. At any rate, I guess the first
early version would be (1.1|2.0).0-M1 (milestone 1), or perhaps go
straight to "-beta1"if you feel really overconfident!

More information about the jcifs mailing list