[VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Ken Giusti
Folks,

I'm calling a formal vote on the recent discussion about qpid-cpp versioning:

http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Can-the-next-release-of-the-C-broker-and-tools-be-1-0-0-td7633329.html

 [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.

 [ ] No - continue with the current 0.N version format.

--
-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Steve Huston
[X] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Giusti [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 10:24 AM
> To: Qpid Dev <[hidden email]>
> Subject: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components
>
> Folks,
>
> I'm calling a formal vote on the recent discussion about qpid-cpp versioning:
>
> http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Can-the-next-release-of-the-C-broker-
> and-tools-be-1-0-0-td7633329.html
>
>  [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have
> been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic
> versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes
> from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.
>
>  [ ] No - continue with the current 0.N version format.
>
> --
> -K
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
> commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Chuck Rolke
In reply to this post by Ken Giusti
[x] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have

----- Original Message -----

> From: "Ken Giusti" <[hidden email]>
> To: "Qpid Dev" <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 10:23:44 AM
> Subject: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components
>
> Folks,
>
> I'm calling a formal vote on the recent discussion about qpid-cpp versioning:
>
> http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Can-the-next-release-of-the-C-broker-and-tools-be-1-0-0-td7633329.html
>
>  [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have
>  been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic
>  versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes
>  from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.
>
>  [ ] No - continue with the current 0.N version format.
>
> --
> -K
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Timothy Bish
In reply to this post by Ken Giusti
On 11/10/2015 10:23 AM, Ken Giusti wrote:
>  [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.

[X] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.


--
Tim Bish
Sr Software Engineer | RedHat Inc.
[hidden email] | www.redhat.com
twitter: @tabish121
blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Robbie Gemmell
Administrator
In reply to this post by Ken Giusti
On 10 November 2015 at 15:23, Ken Giusti <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I'm calling a formal vote on the recent discussion about qpid-cpp versioning:
>
> http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Can-the-next-release-of-the-C-broker-and-tools-be-1-0-0-td7633329.html
>
>  [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.
>
>  [ ] No - continue with the current 0.N version format.
>
> --
> -K
>

 [ +1 ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its
components have been moved to their own source tree. The first release
using semantic versioning will have the initial version number of
1.(N+1).0, where N comes from the last stable release of qpid-cpp
using the 0.N version format.

However for me the first thing to decide is probably who will do the
source tree reorg, and when, since we have really been at this point
before and it didnt go anywhere in the end for these bits. It needs
folks familiar with the bits in question to help do the move and
ensure it goes smoothly, otherwise they could end up in their nice new
tree (/repo eventually?) in a not-so-functional state.

Robbie

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

fadams
In reply to this post by Ken Giusti
[X] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.



On 10/11/15 15:23, Ken Giusti wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I'm calling a formal vote on the recent discussion about qpid-cpp versioning:
>
> http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Can-the-next-release-of-the-C-broker-and-tools-be-1-0-0-td7633329.html
>
>   [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.
>
>   [ ] No - continue with the current 0.N version format.
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

aconway.rh
In reply to this post by Ken Giusti
 [X] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components
have been moved to their own source tree. The first release using
semantic versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0,
where N comes from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N
version format.

On Tue, 2015-11-10 at 10:23 -0500, Ken Giusti wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I'm calling a formal vote on the recent discussion about qpid-cpp
> versioning:
>
> http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Can-the-next-release-of-the-C-broke
> r-and-tools-be-1-0-0-td7633329.html
>
>  [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its
> components have been moved to their own source tree. The first
> release using semantic versioning will have the initial version
> number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes from the last stable release of
> qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.
>
>  [ ] No - continue with the current 0.N version format.
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Ted Ross
In reply to this post by Ken Giusti
[X] Yes

On 11/10/2015 10:23 AM, Ken Giusti wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I'm calling a formal vote on the recent discussion about qpid-cpp versioning:
>
> http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Can-the-next-release-of-the-C-broker-and-tools-be-1-0-0-td7633329.html
>
>   [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.
>
>   [ ] No - continue with the current 0.N version format.
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Pavel Moravec
In reply to this post by Ken Giusti
----- Original Message -----

> From: "Ken Giusti" <[hidden email]>
> To: "Qpid Dev" <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Tuesday, 10 November, 2015 4:23:44 PM
> Subject: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components
>
> Folks,
>
> I'm calling a formal vote on the recent discussion about qpid-cpp versioning:
>
> http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Can-the-next-release-of-the-C-broker-and-tools-be-1-0-0-td7633329.html
>
>  [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have
>  been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic
>  versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes
>  from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.
>
>  [ ] No - continue with the current 0.N version format.

[X] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning, bounce version to 1.*

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Justin Ross-3
In reply to this post by Ken Giusti
[X] Yes

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Ken Giusti <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I'm calling a formal vote on the recent discussion about qpid-cpp
> versioning:
>
>
> http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Can-the-next-release-of-the-C-broker-and-tools-be-1-0-0-td7633329.html
>
>  [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components
> have been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic
> versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes
> from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.
>
>  [ ] No - continue with the current 0.N version format.
>
> --
> -K
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Justin Ross-3
In reply to this post by Robbie Gemmell
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
wrote:
>
> However for me the first thing to decide is probably who will do the
> source tree reorg, and when, since we have really been at this point
> before and it didnt go anywhere in the end for these bits. It needs
> folks familiar with the bits in question to help do the move and
> ensure it goes smoothly, otherwise they could end up in their nice new
> tree (/repo eventually?) in a not-so-functional state.
>

I've taken a stab at this once, and collected some notes.  I moved the C++
broker related tools and qmf/console.py into the cpp tree and adjusted
cmake and the test environment scripts to pick them up.  I stopped short of
really proving it out, but I think a second attempt would find success.

I propose to start the process for a Qpid C++ release once we've completed
the next Proton release, targeting it about a month after.  Proton 0.12.0
is set for the end of January, and so I'd set Qpid C++ 1.35.0 for the end
of February.

IMO, we should make the jump to git at the same time, but it's not critical.

Justin
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Robbie Gemmell
Administrator
On 11 November 2015 at 14:54, Justin Ross <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> However for me the first thing to decide is probably who will do the
>> source tree reorg, and when, since we have really been at this point
>> before and it didnt go anywhere in the end for these bits. It needs
>> folks familiar with the bits in question to help do the move and
>> ensure it goes smoothly, otherwise they could end up in their nice new
>> tree (/repo eventually?) in a not-so-functional state.
>>
>
> I've taken a stab at this once, and collected some notes.  I moved the C++
> broker related tools and qmf/console.py into the cpp tree and adjusted
> cmake and the test environment scripts to pick them up.  I stopped short of
> really proving it out, but I think a second attempt would find success.
>

Great.

> I propose to start the process for a Qpid C++ release once we've completed
> the next Proton release, targeting it about a month after.  Proton 0.12.0
> is set for the end of January, and so I'd set Qpid C++ 1.35.0 for the end
> of February.
>

Just to clarify, with "completed the next Proton release" do you mean
0.11.0, or 0.12.0? If the former, sounds good. If the latter, it seems
quite a long time to wait given the improvements and fixes already
there since qpid-cpp 0.34 back in June.

> IMO, we should make the jump to git at the same time, but it's not critical.

Agreed.

>
> Justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[RESULT] [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Ken Giusti
In reply to this post by Ken Giusti
Folks,

There were 9 +1 votes, and no other votes received. The vote has passed.

I have opened up two tasks in JIRA to track both the migration of qpid-cpp to its own source tree and the move to semantic versioning:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6856
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6857



----- Forwarded Message -----

> From: "Ken Giusti" <[hidden email]>
> To: "Qpid Dev" <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 10:23:44 AM
> Subject: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components
>
> Folks,
>
> I'm calling a formal vote on the recent discussion about qpid-cpp versioning:
>
> http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Can-the-next-release-of-the-C-broker-and-tools-be-1-0-0-td7633329.html
>
>  [ ] Yes - Adopt semantic versioning for qpid-cpp after its components have
>  been moved to their own source tree. The first release using semantic
>  versioning will have the initial version number of 1.(N+1).0, where N comes
>  from the last stable release of qpid-cpp using the 0.N version format.
>
>  [ ] No - continue with the current 0.N version format.
>
> --
> -K
>

--
-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Use semantic versioning for the qpid-cpp components

Justin Ross-3
In reply to this post by Robbie Gemmell
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> > I propose to start the process for a Qpid C++ release once we've
> completed
> > the next Proton release, targeting it about a month after.  Proton 0.12.0
> > is set for the end of January, and so I'd set Qpid C++ 1.35.0 for the end
> > of February.
> >
>
> Just to clarify, with "completed the next Proton release" do you mean
> 0.11.0, or 0.12.0? If the former, sounds good. If the latter, it seems
> quite a long time to wait given the improvements and fixes already
> there since qpid-cpp 0.34 back in June.
>

I did mean the latter, but you're right.  It's too long between releases.
I'll start the exploratory reorganization work this month so we can start
the C++ release process in December.