users@jersey.java.net

Re: [Jersey] Releasing Jersey 1.1.5 on the week of Jan 18th

From: Erdinc Yilmazel <erdinc_at_yilmazel.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:23:32 +0000

I think the first impression of a 3.0 release also makes you think as if
there's been a major change in the library. I would call the next version
1.5 or something like that and go on with 1.6 and so on. When or if a JAX-RS
2.0 is released I would also make a major version upgrade in Jersey too.

Erdinc

On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Paul Sandoz <Paul.Sandoz_at_sun.com> wrote:

>
> On Jan 8, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Erdinc Yilmazel wrote:
>
> Why not 2.0?
>
>
> Because i did not want to confuse developers into thinking there had been a
> 2.0 release of JAX-RS. Of course even though a 2.0 release of JAX-RS has not
> occurred some might think it plausible but a 3.0 is not so plausible, and
> from then on there should be enough distance between the two versions. as
> any new major version of JAX-RS will result in a new major version of
> Jersey.
>
> Does that seem reasonable?
>
> Paul.
>
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Paul Sandoz <Paul.Sandoz_at_sun.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We plan to release Jersey 1.1.5 on the week on Jan 18th.
>>
>> Jakub is working hard on the OSGi stuff but we want to make sure we get it
>> right, and it might require some more soak time in the trunk (currently it
>> is in a branch) for other developers to have a play with and provide
>> feedback.
>>
>>
>> After that release i am proposing to change the versioning scheme of
>> Jersey. Currently we retain the first two numbers as the major and minor
>> version of the JAX-RS API Jersey implementations. This is not ideal:
>>
>> 1) Jersey has it's own API that evolves separately it makes it harder to
>> signal major, minor, micro status of Jersey itself;
>>
>> 2) The current versioning scheme does not work very well with maven and
>> OSGi, for example 1.1.4.1; and
>>
>> 3) Then we can consider Markus recommendations for declaring version
>> ranges for dependencies.
>>
>>
>> I have been advised that to avoid confusion with the JAX-RS version we
>> should choose a version of Jersey that is clearly different. Thus i propose
>> that we start the next version at 3.0, even though of course it does not
>> really represent a major change.
>>
>> Paul.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_jersey.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_jersey.dev.java.net
>>
>>
>
>