version names

[Konstantin Boudnik-2]

On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have prefix
"ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are Ignite's
versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA versions still
aren't the same as the release ones.

Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do it
starting from 1.5?

Cos

----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]> -----

Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA

Done.

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new release
> ignite-1.4.1.
>
> For future releases, it would be great if the release manager adds the next
> micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the first RC.
>
> Thanks,
>
> *Raúl Kripalani*
> PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
> Messaging Engineer
> http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
>

----- End forwarded message -----

[Raul Kripalani-2]

Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in Git if
they aren't (cannot check now).

What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's being
done now?

In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave open a
maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather can
creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do this
once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.
On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have prefix
> "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are
> Ignite's
> versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA versions still
> aren't the same as the release ones.
>
> Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do it
> starting from 1.5?
>
> Cos
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> -----
>
> Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
>
> Done.
>
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new release
> > ignite-1.4.1.
> >
> > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager adds the
> next
> > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the first RC.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
> > Messaging Engineer
> > http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> >
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>

[yzhdanov]

I would leave it as is for now. Just to avoid any extra efforts. Another
point is - what if we decide to release products like accelerator for
hadoop or data fabric for .net separately at some point? We will need to
somehow distinguish.

--Yakov

2015-09-26 23:23 GMT+03:00 Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>:

> Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in Git if
> they aren't (cannot check now).
>
> What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's being
> done now?
>
> In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave open a
> maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather can
> creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do this
> once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.
> On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have prefix
> > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are
> > Ignite's
> > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA versions
> still
> > aren't the same as the release ones.
> >
> > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do it
> > starting from 1.5?
> >
> > Cos
> >
> > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > -----
> >
> > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> >
> > Done.
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new
> release
> > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > >
> > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager adds the
> > next
> > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the first
> RC.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data
> and
> > > Messaging Engineer
> > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > >
> >
> > ----- End forwarded message -----
> >
>

[Konstantin Boudnik-2]

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 09:23PM, Raul Kripalani wrote:
> Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in Git if
> they aren't (cannot check now).

Tag names aren't much of the concern IMO, but it won't hurt either. Version
numbers are more visible, and their mishandling might have dire consequences.

> What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's being
> done now?
>
> In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave open a
> maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather can
> creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do this
> once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.

We have this lengthy discussion a few months back
    http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Git-branches-and-development-process-tp889p945.html

and it got settled.

Cos

> On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have prefix
> > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are
> > Ignite's
> > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA versions still
> > aren't the same as the release ones.
> >
> > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do it
> > starting from 1.5?
> >
> > Cos
> >
> > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > -----
> >
> > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> >
> > Done.
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new release
> > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > >
> > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager adds the
> > next
> > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the first RC.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
> > > Messaging Engineer
> > > http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > >
> >
> > ----- End forwarded message -----
> >

[Konstantin Boudnik-2]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 12:11AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> I would leave it as is for now. Just to avoid any extra efforts. Another

There's no effort in it, really - I can rename the versions in the next 15
seconds. Or better yet - let's leave 1.4* as it is, and start normalized
version naming in JIRA from 1.5 and on. It won't affect anything, and all
remaining tickets from ignite-1.4 - if any - will be automatically moved to
1.5 once you close the current release in JIRA.

> point is - what if we decide to release products like accelerator for
> hadoop or data fabric for .net separately at some point? We will need to
> somehow distinguish.

Using versions to distinguish between release composition is pretty bad idea.
I don't even remember how many times people were burned by it. If we need to
release a separate fabric for .net you'd do
    ignite-fabric-net-1.5-src.tgz
    ignite-fabric-1.5-src.tgz

It still will be 1.5 but you'd have two different source artifacts. If you
decide not to release fabric for anything else but .net in 1.5 - then you just
won't have the second source file around.

Cos

> --Yakov
>
> 2015-09-26 23:23 GMT+03:00 Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in Git if
> > they aren't (cannot check now).
> >
> > What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's being
> > done now?
> >
> > In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave open a
> > maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather can
> > creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do this
> > once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.
> > On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have prefix
> > > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are
> > > Ignite's
> > > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA versions
> > still
> > > aren't the same as the release ones.
> > >
> > > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do it
> > > starting from 1.5?
> > >
> > > Cos
> > >
> > > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > -----
> > >
> > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > To: [hidden email]
> > > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> > >
> > > Done.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > >
> > > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new
> > release
> > > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > > >
> > > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager adds the
> > > next
> > > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the first
> > RC.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data
> > and
> > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > >
> > >
> > > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > >
> >

[Konstantin Boudnik-2]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 02:20AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 09:23PM, Raul Kripalani wrote:
> > Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in Git if
> > they aren't (cannot check now).
>
> Tag names aren't much of the concern IMO, but it won't hurt either. Version
> numbers are more visible, and their mishandling might have dire consequences.
>
> > What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's being
> > done now?
> >
> > In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave open a
> > maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather can
> > creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do this
> > once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.

One more thing (should re-read my own emails before sending them ;) - why
creating a maintenance branch if there's no plans (yet?!) to release a minor
update? And once the release is tagged it is save to drop the branch without
fear of confusing the release tip with anything else.

Thanks

> We have this lengthy discussion a few months back
>     http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Git-branches-and-development-process-tp889p945.html
>
> and it got settled.
>
> Cos
>
> > On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have prefix
> > > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are
> > > Ignite's
> > > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA versions still
> > > aren't the same as the release ones.
> > >
> > > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do it
> > > starting from 1.5?
> > >
> > > Cos
> > >
> > > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > -----
> > >
> > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > To: [hidden email]
> > > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> > >
> > > Done.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > >
> > > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new release
> > > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > > >
> > > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager adds the
> > > next
> > > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the first RC.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
> > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > >
> > >
> > > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > >

[yzhdanov]

Cos, believe me there will be efforts. How about maven poms and automated
procedures? This will need to be fixed and retested. I want to avoid it
unless it's absolutely needed.

Thanks!

Yakov
On Sep 27, 2015 12:24, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 12:11AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > I would leave it as is for now. Just to avoid any extra efforts. Another
>
> There's no effort in it, really - I can rename the versions in the next 15
> seconds. Or better yet - let's leave 1.4* as it is, and start normalized
> version naming in JIRA from 1.5 and on. It won't affect anything, and all
> remaining tickets from ignite-1.4 - if any - will be automatically moved to
> 1.5 once you close the current release in JIRA.
>
> > point is - what if we decide to release products like accelerator for
> > hadoop or data fabric for .net separately at some point? We will need to
> > somehow distinguish.
>
> Using versions to distinguish between release composition is pretty bad
> idea.
> I don't even remember how many times people were burned by it. If we need
> to
> release a separate fabric for .net you'd do
>     ignite-fabric-net-1.5-src.tgz
>     ignite-fabric-1.5-src.tgz
>
> It still will be 1.5 but you'd have two different source artifacts. If you
> decide not to release fabric for anything else but .net in 1.5 - then you
> just
> won't have the second source file around.
>
> Cos
>
> > --Yakov
> >
> > 2015-09-26 23:23 GMT+03:00 Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in Git
> if
> > > they aren't (cannot check now).
> > >
> > > What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's
> being
> > > done now?
> > >
> > > In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave open a
> > > maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather can
> > > creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do this
> > > once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.
> > > On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have
> prefix
> > > > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are
> > > > Ignite's
> > > > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA versions
> > > still
> > > > aren't the same as the release ones.
> > > >
> > > > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do it
> > > > starting from 1.5?
> > > >
> > > > Cos
> > > >
> > > > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > -----
> > > >
> > > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > > To: [hidden email]
> > > > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> > > >
> > > > Done.
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > >
> > > > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new
> > > release
> > > > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > > > >
> > > > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager adds
> the
> > > > next
> > > > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the
> first
> > > RC.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big
> Data
> > > and
> > > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > > >
> > >
>

[dsetrakyan]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 3:06 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Cos, believe me there will be efforts. How about maven poms and automated
> procedures? This will need to be fixed and retested. I want to avoid it
> unless it's absolutely needed.
>

I agree with Yakov. We have not had a single issue with these version
names. Why fix that's not broken?

>
> Thanks!
>
> Yakov
> On Sep 27, 2015 12:24, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 12:11AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > I would leave it as is for now. Just to avoid any extra efforts.
> Another
> >
> > There's no effort in it, really - I can rename the versions in the next
> 15
> > seconds. Or better yet - let's leave 1.4* as it is, and start normalized
> > version naming in JIRA from 1.5 and on. It won't affect anything, and all
> > remaining tickets from ignite-1.4 - if any - will be automatically moved
> to
> > 1.5 once you close the current release in JIRA.
> >
> > > point is - what if we decide to release products like accelerator for
> > > hadoop or data fabric for .net separately at some point? We will need
> to
> > > somehow distinguish.
> >
> > Using versions to distinguish between release composition is pretty bad
> > idea.
> > I don't even remember how many times people were burned by it. If we need
> > to
> > release a separate fabric for .net you'd do
> >     ignite-fabric-net-1.5-src.tgz
> >     ignite-fabric-1.5-src.tgz
> >
> > It still will be 1.5 but you'd have two different source artifacts. If
> you
> > decide not to release fabric for anything else but .net in 1.5 - then you
> > just
> > won't have the second source file around.
> >
> > Cos
> >
> > > --Yakov
> > >
> > > 2015-09-26 23:23 GMT+03:00 Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > > Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in Git
> > if
> > > > they aren't (cannot check now).
> > > >
> > > > What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's
> > being
> > > > done now?
> > > >
> > > > In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave open
> a
> > > > maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather
> can
> > > > creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do
> this
> > > > once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.
> > > > On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have
> > prefix
> > > > > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are
> > > > > Ignite's
> > > > > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA
> versions
> > > > still
> > > > > aren't the same as the release ones.
> > > > >
> > > > > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do
> it
> > > > > starting from 1.5?
> > > > >
> > > > > Cos
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > -----
> > > > >
> > > > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > > > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > > > To: [hidden email]
> > > > > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> > > > >
> > > > > Done.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new
> > > > release
> > > > > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager
> adds
> > the
> > > > > next
> > > > > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the
> > first
> > > > RC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big
> > Data
> > > > and
> > > > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
>

[Raul Kripalani-2]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 09:23PM, Raul Kripalani wrote:
> > Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in Git if
> > they aren't (cannot check now).
>
> Tag names aren't much of the concern IMO, but it won't hurt either. Version
> numbers are more visible, and their mishandling might have dire
> consequences.
>

Cos, correct me if I'm wrong, but what you're bringing up is a matter of
superfluous information in the JIRA version numbers. To me, that's just
aesthetics and not so important.

The point I'm making is one of consistency. Currently we have:

a) Inconsistent tag names:

$] git tag -l
...
1.3.2
1.3.2-p2
1.3.3
...
1.4.1
...
ignite-1.3.0-incubating-rc1
ignite-1.3.0-incubating-rc2
ignite-1.4.0-SNAPSHOT-rc1
...
release-1.0.0-RC3

We need consistent nomenclature. Of course, some tags are historical, some
are leftovers from the incubation, but all of them are visible to our
users... We ought to do housekeeping. I'd be up for the job, but since I'm
relatively new here and don't have the project's history, someone else is
more appropriate.

b) Confusing branch names:

...
ignite-1168
ignite-1169
ignite-1170
ignite-1171
...
ignite-1.4
ignite-1.4.1

All of our 230+ branches start with "ignite" in a linear fashion, no matter
if they are feature branches (ignite-nnnn => ticket number) or a
maintenance/release branch (ignite-x.y.z). The moment we have IGNITE-2nnn
tickets + an Ignite 2.y.z release, it's gonna get evil.

Hence I propose to categorise branches with prefixes "feature/",
"release/", "stream/", etc. Actual prefixes up for discussion.

>
> > What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's being
> > done now?
> >
> > In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave open a
> > maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather can
> > creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do this
> > once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.
>
> We have this lengthy discussion a few months back
>
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Git-branches-and-development-process-tp889p945.html
>
> and it got settled.
>

Thanks for the reference. Branko's proposal is pretty much standard
industry practice and it contains the point I'm making. However, the devil
is in the details. He said:

 >  When you're ready to begin stabilization for a release, create a
 >   release branch (rel-1.2.x for example) from the master branch. Only
 >   bug fixes happen on the release branch. When you're happy with the
 >   stability of the release, just tag the release branch (e.g., 1.2.0)
 >   and publish. *This now becomes the bugfix branch for the 1.2.x
release. *

Note the last sentence. This means creating a long-lived ignite-1.4.x
branch for maintenance, where each release == a tag within it (well,
technically of a fork because there'll be an additional commit changing POM
versions to release versions).

In contrast, what's happening now is that the ignite-1.4 branch is
abandoned and ignite-1.4.1 is created out of it, carrying over the history
from ignite-1.4. So maintenance branches (or bugfix, to paraphrase him) are
not long-lived but ephemeral (à la "release branch"). That wasn't what the
community settled on, and that's the point I'm trying to make.

In other words: we have no ignite-1.4.x branch, rather:
ignite-1.4.0 (dead)
ignite-1.4.1
...

P.S.: I sympathise if you feel this email is long, but there's no other way
to get my point across ;-)

> Cos
>
> > On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have
> prefix
> > > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are
> > > Ignite's
> > > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA versions
> still
> > > aren't the same as the release ones.
> > >
> > > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do it
> > > starting from 1.5?
> > >
> > > Cos
> > >
> > > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > -----
> > >
> > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > To: [hidden email]
> > > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> > >
> > > Done.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > >
> > > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new
> release
> > > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > > >
> > > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager adds
> the
> > > next
> > > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the
> first RC.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big
> Data and
> > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > >
> > >
> > > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > >
>

[Alexey Kuznetsov-2]

Agree with Raul about having ignite-1.4 branch as release branch and having
ignite-xxxx branches that correspond to JIRA issues.
In Idea branches sorted alphabetically and it is already painful to search
release branch among features branches.

Let's at least have a prefix "release-" for release branches?

What do you think?

--
Alexey Kuznetsov
GridGain Systems
www.gridgain.com

[Konstantin Boudnik-2]

Yakov

versions in the pom files are _absolutely_ fine. E.g
        <version>1.5.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
right now.

We are talking ONLY about JIRA, and JIRA version "ignite-1.5" doesn't really
look like "1.5" in Maven repository. I don't really see what's the problem
with the proposed names fix.

Cos

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 01:06PM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:

> Cos, believe me there will be efforts. How about maven poms and automated
> procedures? This will need to be fixed and retested. I want to avoid it
> unless it's absolutely needed.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Yakov
> On Sep 27, 2015 12:24, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 12:11AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > I would leave it as is for now. Just to avoid any extra efforts. Another
> >
> > There's no effort in it, really - I can rename the versions in the next 15
> > seconds. Or better yet - let's leave 1.4* as it is, and start normalized
> > version naming in JIRA from 1.5 and on. It won't affect anything, and all
> > remaining tickets from ignite-1.4 - if any - will be automatically moved to
> > 1.5 once you close the current release in JIRA.
> >
> > > point is - what if we decide to release products like accelerator for
> > > hadoop or data fabric for .net separately at some point? We will need to
> > > somehow distinguish.
> >
> > Using versions to distinguish between release composition is pretty bad
> > idea.
> > I don't even remember how many times people were burned by it. If we need
> > to
> > release a separate fabric for .net you'd do
> >     ignite-fabric-net-1.5-src.tgz
> >     ignite-fabric-1.5-src.tgz
> >
> > It still will be 1.5 but you'd have two different source artifacts. If you
> > decide not to release fabric for anything else but .net in 1.5 - then you
> > just
> > won't have the second source file around.
> >
> > Cos
> >
> > > --Yakov
> > >
> > > 2015-09-26 23:23 GMT+03:00 Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > > Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in Git
> > if
> > > > they aren't (cannot check now).
> > > >
> > > > What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's
> > being
> > > > done now?
> > > >
> > > > In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave open a
> > > > maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather can
> > > > creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do this
> > > > once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.
> > > > On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have
> > prefix
> > > > > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are
> > > > > Ignite's
> > > > > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA versions
> > > > still
> > > > > aren't the same as the release ones.
> > > > >
> > > > > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do it
> > > > > starting from 1.5?
> > > > >
> > > > > Cos
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > -----
> > > > >
> > > > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > > > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > > > To: [hidden email]
> > > > > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> > > > >
> > > > > Done.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new
> > > > release
> > > > > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager adds
> > the
> > > > > next
> > > > > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the
> > first
> > > > RC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big
> > Data
> > > > and
> > > > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > > > >
> > > >
> >

[Konstantin Boudnik-2]

Yeah, tag names need to be fixed going forward - they look funny for sure.
Something like
    release-x.y.z

would be more preferrable.

Cos

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 03:59PM, Raul Kripalani wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 09:23PM, Raul Kripalani wrote:
> > > Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in Git if
> > > they aren't (cannot check now).
> >
> > Tag names aren't much of the concern IMO, but it won't hurt either. Version
> > numbers are more visible, and their mishandling might have dire
> > consequences.
> >
>
> Cos, correct me if I'm wrong, but what you're bringing up is a matter of
> superfluous information in the JIRA version numbers. To me, that's just
> aesthetics and not so important.
>
> The point I'm making is one of consistency. Currently we have:
>
> a) Inconsistent tag names:
>
> $] git tag -l
> ...
> 1.3.2
> 1.3.2-p2
> 1.3.3
> ...
> 1.4.1
> ...
> ignite-1.3.0-incubating-rc1
> ignite-1.3.0-incubating-rc2
> ignite-1.4.0-SNAPSHOT-rc1
> ...
> release-1.0.0-RC3
>
> We need consistent nomenclature. Of course, some tags are historical, some
> are leftovers from the incubation, but all of them are visible to our
> users... We ought to do housekeeping. I'd be up for the job, but since I'm
> relatively new here and don't have the project's history, someone else is
> more appropriate.
>
> b) Confusing branch names:
>
> ...
> ignite-1168
> ignite-1169
> ignite-1170
> ignite-1171
> ...
> ignite-1.4
> ignite-1.4.1
>
> All of our 230+ branches start with "ignite" in a linear fashion, no matter
> if they are feature branches (ignite-nnnn => ticket number) or a
> maintenance/release branch (ignite-x.y.z). The moment we have IGNITE-2nnn
> tickets + an Ignite 2.y.z release, it's gonna get evil.
>
> Hence I propose to categorise branches with prefixes "feature/",
> "release/", "stream/", etc. Actual prefixes up for discussion.
>
>
> >
> > > What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's being
> > > done now?
> > >
> > > In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave open a
> > > maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather can
> > > creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do this
> > > once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.
> >
> > We have this lengthy discussion a few months back
> >
> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Git-branches-and-development-process-tp889p945.html
> >
> > and it got settled.
> >
>
> Thanks for the reference. Branko's proposal is pretty much standard
> industry practice and it contains the point I'm making. However, the devil
> is in the details. He said:
>
>  >  When you're ready to begin stabilization for a release, create a
>  >   release branch (rel-1.2.x for example) from the master branch. Only
>  >   bug fixes happen on the release branch. When you're happy with the
>  >   stability of the release, just tag the release branch (e.g., 1.2.0)
>  >   and publish. *This now becomes the bugfix branch for the 1.2.x
> release. *
>
> Note the last sentence. This means creating a long-lived ignite-1.4.x
> branch for maintenance, where each release == a tag within it (well,
> technically of a fork because there'll be an additional commit changing POM
> versions to release versions).
>
> In contrast, what's happening now is that the ignite-1.4 branch is
> abandoned and ignite-1.4.1 is created out of it, carrying over the history
> from ignite-1.4. So maintenance branches (or bugfix, to paraphrase him) are
> not long-lived but ephemeral (à la "release branch"). That wasn't what the
> community settled on, and that's the point I'm trying to make.
>
> In other words: we have no ignite-1.4.x branch, rather:
> ignite-1.4.0 (dead)
> ignite-1.4.1
> ...
>
> P.S.: I sympathise if you feel this email is long, but there's no other way
> to get my point across ;-)
>
>
> > Cos
> >
> > > On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have
> > prefix
> > > > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these are
> > > > Ignite's
> > > > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA versions
> > still
> > > > aren't the same as the release ones.
> > > >
> > > > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and do it
> > > > starting from 1.5?
> > > >
> > > > Cos
> > > >
> > > > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > > -----
> > > >
> > > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > > To: [hidden email]
> > > > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> > > >
> > > > Done.
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > >
> > > > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a new
> > release
> > > > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > > > >
> > > > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager adds
> > the
> > > > next
> > > > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the
> > first RC.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big
> > Data and
> > > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > > >
> >

[Raul Kripalani-2]

My concrete proposal:

* Prefix branches with "something/", as many UI tools parse slashes into a
tree structure. It's also what's proposed in Git flow.
* Stay away from the word "release" for this, as it can be confused with
the release branch for a single release. This branch represents a
"maintenance line" or "stream". I personally like the term "stream".
* Keep a placeholder in the name, e.g. ignite-1.4.x so it's clear it's not
for a concrete release, but the entire stream of releases.
* Maybe drop the word "ignite", e.g.: stream/1.4.x. Someone raised the
point about releasing subprojects, but the key question is: would all
projects share the same lifecycle? (maintaining multiple subprojects with
different lifecycles is a lot of effort...). If yes, dropping the prefix
'ignite' would not obliterate information.

*Raúl Kripalani*
PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
Messaging Engineer
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Alexey Kuznetsov <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Agree with Raul about having ignite-1.4 branch as release branch and having
> ignite-xxxx branches that correspond to JIRA issues.
> In Idea branches sorted alphabetically and it is already painful to search
> release branch among features branches.
>
> Let's at least have a prefix "release-" for release branches?
>
> What do you think?
>
> --
> Alexey Kuznetsov
> GridGain Systems
> www.gridgain.com
>

[yzhdanov]

I am ok with jira version renaming.

However, tag name "ignite-1.4.0-rc1" was created automatically, and
changing this will lead to lots of changes inside. We leave this as is.
Correct?

Tags like "1.3.3-p3" should be just removed. They were committed to apache
git by mistake. Anton V., can you please look why did that happen?

Raul, as far as ignite-1.4.0-SNAPSHOT-rc1 - I don't have it after running
"git fetch --tags". This seems to be your local tag. Anyone has ideas how
it could appear?


--Yakov

2015-09-27 18:24 GMT+03:00 Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]>:

> Yakov
>
> versions in the pom files are _absolutely_ fine. E.g
>         <version>1.5.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
> right now.
>
> We are talking ONLY about JIRA, and JIRA version "ignite-1.5" doesn't
> really
> look like "1.5" in Maven repository. I don't really see what's the problem
> with the proposed names fix.
>
> Cos
>
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 01:06PM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > Cos, believe me there will be efforts. How about maven poms and automated
> > procedures? This will need to be fixed and retested. I want to avoid it
> > unless it's absolutely needed.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Yakov
> > On Sep 27, 2015 12:24, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 12:11AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > > I would leave it as is for now. Just to avoid any extra efforts.
> Another
> > >
> > > There's no effort in it, really - I can rename the versions in the
> next 15
> > > seconds. Or better yet - let's leave 1.4* as it is, and start
> normalized
> > > version naming in JIRA from 1.5 and on. It won't affect anything, and
> all
> > > remaining tickets from ignite-1.4 - if any - will be automatically
> moved to
> > > 1.5 once you close the current release in JIRA.
> > >
> > > > point is - what if we decide to release products like accelerator for
> > > > hadoop or data fabric for .net separately at some point? We will
> need to
> > > > somehow distinguish.
> > >
> > > Using versions to distinguish between release composition is pretty bad
> > > idea.
> > > I don't even remember how many times people were burned by it. If we
> need
> > > to
> > > release a separate fabric for .net you'd do
> > >     ignite-fabric-net-1.5-src.tgz
> > >     ignite-fabric-1.5-src.tgz
> > >
> > > It still will be 1.5 but you'd have two different source artifacts. If
> you
> > > decide not to release fabric for anything else but .net in 1.5 - then
> you
> > > just
> > > won't have the second source file around.
> > >
> > > Cos
> > >
> > > > --Yakov
> > > >
> > > > 2015-09-26 23:23 GMT+03:00 Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>:
> > > >
> > > > > Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in
> Git
> > > if
> > > > > they aren't (cannot check now).
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's
> > > being
> > > > > done now?
> > > > >
> > > > > In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave
> open a
> > > > > maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather
> can
> > > > > creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do
> this
> > > > > once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.
> > > > > On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have
> > > prefix
> > > > > > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these
> are
> > > > > > Ignite's
> > > > > > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA
> versions
> > > > > still
> > > > > > aren't the same as the release ones.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and
> do it
> > > > > > starting from 1.5?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cos
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > -----
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > > > > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > > > > To: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Done.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a
> new
> > > > > release
> > > > > > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager
> adds
> > > the
> > > > > > next
> > > > > > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the
> > > first
> > > > > RC.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration,
> Big
> > > Data
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
>

[Sergey Kozlov]

ignite-1.4.0-SNAPSHOT-rc1 created by attempt to release 1.4.0 but by
mistake -SNAPSHOT has not been removed.

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 11:11 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am ok with jira version renaming.
>
> However, tag name "ignite-1.4.0-rc1" was created automatically, and
> changing this will lead to lots of changes inside. We leave this as is.
> Correct?
>
> Tags like "1.3.3-p3" should be just removed. They were committed to apache
> git by mistake. Anton V., can you please look why did that happen?
>
> Raul, as far as ignite-1.4.0-SNAPSHOT-rc1 - I don't have it after running
> "git fetch --tags". This seems to be your local tag. Anyone has ideas how
> it could appear?
>
>
> --Yakov
>
> 2015-09-27 18:24 GMT+03:00 Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Yakov
> >
> > versions in the pom files are _absolutely_ fine. E.g
> >         <version>1.5.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
> > right now.
> >
> > We are talking ONLY about JIRA, and JIRA version "ignite-1.5" doesn't
> > really
> > look like "1.5" in Maven repository. I don't really see what's the
> problem
> > with the proposed names fix.
> >
> > Cos
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 01:06PM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > Cos, believe me there will be efforts. How about maven poms and
> automated
> > > procedures? This will need to be fixed and retested. I want to avoid it
> > > unless it's absolutely needed.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Yakov
> > > On Sep 27, 2015 12:24, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 12:11AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > > > I would leave it as is for now. Just to avoid any extra efforts.
> > Another
> > > >
> > > > There's no effort in it, really - I can rename the versions in the
> > next 15
> > > > seconds. Or better yet - let's leave 1.4* as it is, and start
> > normalized
> > > > version naming in JIRA from 1.5 and on. It won't affect anything, and
> > all
> > > > remaining tickets from ignite-1.4 - if any - will be automatically
> > moved to
> > > > 1.5 once you close the current release in JIRA.
> > > >
> > > > > point is - what if we decide to release products like accelerator
> for
> > > > > hadoop or data fabric for .net separately at some point? We will
> > need to
> > > > > somehow distinguish.
> > > >
> > > > Using versions to distinguish between release composition is pretty
> bad
> > > > idea.
> > > > I don't even remember how many times people were burned by it. If we
> > need
> > > > to
> > > > release a separate fabric for .net you'd do
> > > >     ignite-fabric-net-1.5-src.tgz
> > > >     ignite-fabric-1.5-src.tgz
> > > >
> > > > It still will be 1.5 but you'd have two different source artifacts.
> If
> > you
> > > > decide not to release fabric for anything else but .net in 1.5 - then
> > you
> > > > just
> > > > won't have the second source file around.
> > > >
> > > > Cos
> > > >
> > > > > --Yakov
> > > > >
> > > > > 2015-09-26 23:23 GMT+03:00 Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in
> > Git
> > > > if
> > > > > > they aren't (cannot check now).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you think about creating a new branch per release like
> it's
> > > > being
> > > > > > done now?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave
> > open a
> > > > > > maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4)
> rather
> > can
> > > > > > creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We
> do
> > this
> > > > > > once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from
> master.
> > > > > > On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions
> have
> > > > prefix
> > > > > > > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these
> > are
> > > > > > > Ignite's
> > > > > > > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA
> > versions
> > > > > > still
> > > > > > > aren't the same as the release ones.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and
> > do it
> > > > > > > starting from 1.5?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cos
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > -----
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > > > > > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > > > > > To: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Done.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a
> > new
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager
> > adds
> > > > the
> > > > > > > next
> > > > > > > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting
> the
> > > > first
> > > > > > RC.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > > > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration,
> > Big
> > > > Data
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > > > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > > > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > > > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
>

--
Sergey Kozlov

[Konstantin Boudnik-2]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 11:11PM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:

> I am ok with jira version renaming.
>
> However, tag name "ignite-1.4.0-rc1" was created automatically, and
> changing this will lead to lots of changes inside. We leave this as is.
> Correct?
>
> Tags like "1.3.3-p3" should be just removed. They were committed to apache
> git by mistake. Anton V., can you please look why did that happen?
>
> Raul, as far as ignite-1.4.0-SNAPSHOT-rc1 - I don't have it after running
> "git fetch --tags". This seems to be your local tag. Anyone has ideas how
> it could appear?

You might not have it because you haven't fetch the repo between the events of
the tag getting pushed into the repo and of it consequent removal from the
repo.

Cos

>
> 2015-09-27 18:24 GMT+03:00 Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Yakov
> >
> > versions in the pom files are _absolutely_ fine. E.g
> >         <version>1.5.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
> > right now.
> >
> > We are talking ONLY about JIRA, and JIRA version "ignite-1.5" doesn't
> > really
> > look like "1.5" in Maven repository. I don't really see what's the problem
> > with the proposed names fix.
> >
> > Cos
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 01:06PM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > Cos, believe me there will be efforts. How about maven poms and automated
> > > procedures? This will need to be fixed and retested. I want to avoid it
> > > unless it's absolutely needed.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Yakov
> > > On Sep 27, 2015 12:24, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 12:11AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > > > I would leave it as is for now. Just to avoid any extra efforts.
> > Another
> > > >
> > > > There's no effort in it, really - I can rename the versions in the
> > next 15
> > > > seconds. Or better yet - let's leave 1.4* as it is, and start
> > normalized
> > > > version naming in JIRA from 1.5 and on. It won't affect anything, and
> > all
> > > > remaining tickets from ignite-1.4 - if any - will be automatically
> > moved to
> > > > 1.5 once you close the current release in JIRA.
> > > >
> > > > > point is - what if we decide to release products like accelerator for
> > > > > hadoop or data fabric for .net separately at some point? We will
> > need to
> > > > > somehow distinguish.
> > > >
> > > > Using versions to distinguish between release composition is pretty bad
> > > > idea.
> > > > I don't even remember how many times people were burned by it. If we
> > need
> > > > to
> > > > release a separate fabric for .net you'd do
> > > >     ignite-fabric-net-1.5-src.tgz
> > > >     ignite-fabric-1.5-src.tgz
> > > >
> > > > It still will be 1.5 but you'd have two different source artifacts. If
> > you
> > > > decide not to release fabric for anything else but .net in 1.5 - then
> > you
> > > > just
> > > > won't have the second source file around.
> > > >
> > > > Cos
> > > >
> > > > > --Yakov
> > > > >
> > > > > 2015-09-26 23:23 GMT+03:00 Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Agree. And we should also normalise tag names and branch names in
> > Git
> > > > if
> > > > > > they aren't (cannot check now).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you think about creating a new branch per release like it's
> > > > being
> > > > > > done now?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In other projects (OSS and non-OSS) we tend to create and leave
> > open a
> > > > > > maintenance branch once per minor version (e.g. ignite-1.4) rather
> > can
> > > > > > creating and deleting branches for every particular version. We do
> > this
> > > > > > once the first release in that maintenance line is cut from master.
> > > > > > On 26 Sep 2015 17:16, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On a somewhat similar note: I just noticed that our versions have
> > > > prefix
> > > > > > > "ignite-". Do we really need it? It is sorta obvious that these
> > are
> > > > > > > Ignite's
> > > > > > > versions, not httpd's :) It seems a bit confusing that JIRA
> > versions
> > > > > > still
> > > > > > > aren't the same as the release ones.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Shall we move to just numerical versions like 1.5 and so on and
> > do it
> > > > > > > starting from 1.5?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cos
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Forwarded message from Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > -----
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:50:08 -0500
> > > > > > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> > > > > > > To: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Need Project Admin rights on JIRA
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Done.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:27 AM, Raul Kripalani <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I need project admin rights for Ignite in JIRA so I can add a
> > new
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > ignite-1.4.1.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For future releases, it would be great if the release manager
> > adds
> > > > the
> > > > > > > next
> > > > > > > > micro [and minor [and major]] versions in JIRA when cutting the
> > > > first
> > > > > > RC.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > > > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration,
> > Big
> > > > Data
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > > > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > > > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > > > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >