On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:50 AM, Tim Edwards
<Edwards.T_at_cambridgeassessment.org.uk> wrote:
> It might be that I was missing the obvious but personally I never realised
> there was a correlation between JAX-RS and Jersey versions.
Perhaps I am in minority, but I would expect Jersey to somewhat follow
JAX-RS versioning scheme, given that it is currently feasible. If
there were other major changes that would warrant major version
upgrade, then this would have to change.
So my opinion is that (a) Maven-style versioning makes sense -- major
version for major non-compatible changes, minor for additional
functionality (backwards compatible), and so on and (b) having Jersey
version relate to JAX-RS version is a nice to have thing too.
And obviously if/when JAX-RS API change to 2.0 is a major incompatible
one, it should bump Jersey into new version anyway.
-+ Tatu +-