[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DISCUSS] Renumber Groovy 2.6 to 2.9

I don't have strong feelings on it, but I think I'd lean against it since we've already released artifacts under the 2.6 banner.
  1. It can be confusing when looking in somewhere like Maven Central that the already released 2.6 artifacts are in the same line as 2.9 (one might conclude without reading this thread that the 2.6 line was abandoned).
  2. If can affect other tooling that's already supporting 2.6, such as docker-groovy.  If I'm using 2.6-jdk8 as a base for my images, I'll have to change to 2.9-jdk8 to continue getting the latest base (or I guess I'll have to keep tagging all future 2.9s also as 2.6 just in case someone was doing that).

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Guillaume Laforge <glaforge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In the past, we've had some version changes like these in the past, at least once or twice.
It's a bit weird but not that confusing, and ultimately users don't care all that much, and usually even forget about it :-)

That said, I don't have a strong opinion.
To Russel's points, we might save us some time by just focusing on updates of 2.5 and 3.0, rather than the current 4 branches maintained.
Even if 2.6(9) and 3.0 are close, it's not critical if the numbers are close too.
So I'd tend to not even bother with renumbering at all.
But frankly, I don't mind :-)


On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:12 PM, John Wagenleitner <john.wagenleitner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
My opinion is that it should be left as 2.6. Since 2.6 has already undergone several pre-releases I think it will may be more confusing to re-number now. Renumbering may also give the impression that a 2.7 or 2.8 might be coming or at least make some wonder what happened to those versions.

On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 8:58 PM Paul King <paulk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


I was wondering what people thought about renumbering Groovy 2.6 to 2.9.
It is only a subtle change but I think better conveys that it isn't a small step up
from 2.5 but rather something just a bit short of 3.


Cheers, Paul.

Guillaume Laforge
Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President
Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform