Versioning of distribution and apps #19

New issue

Closed

opened 2021-02-24 12:33:12 +01:00 by nik · 4 comments

nik commented

2021-02-24 12:33:12 +01:00

(Migrated from edugit.org)

Some time ago, @hansegucker and I discussed the version numbering.

Currently, we release all apps, and the default distribution, with synchronised, semantic versions (we would next release all official apps, and the core, al lset to the version 2.0).

However, we considered a situation where we do regular reelases of the default distribution, but without changes in some apps. In that case, bumping the version would contradict the semantic versioning principle. We thus considered it better to version all apps separately strictly adhering to semantic versioning, and release the default distribution under its own version number. Forthat, we thought we could divert from semantic versioning, and just use the year.month versioning scheme, or something like that.

Then, do we even need to release the distribution under a specific version? Couldn't we just relesae apps, and have the default distribution be a rolling release of the most recent versions of all official apps? Technically, the distribution version has no meaning whatsoever. Its primary and only reason is marketing, because we can sell it as something big and new with a fancy code name.

What would all that mean for our milestone planning? Would we track milestones separately per app agian, or set common targets for the default distribution like we do now?

@all Opinions?

Some time ago, @hansegucker and I discussed the version numbering. Currently, we release all apps, and the default distribution, with synchronised, semantic versions (we would next release all official apps, and the core, al lset to the version `2.0`). However, we considered a situation where we do regular reelases of the default distribution, but without changes in some apps. In that case, bumping the version would contradict the semantic versioning principle. We thus considered it better to version all apps separately strictly adhering to semantic versioning, and release the default distribution under its own version number. Forthat, we thought we could divert from semantic versioning, and just use the `year.month` versioning scheme, or something like that. Then, do we even need to release the distribution under a specific version? Couldn't we just relesae apps, and have the default distribution be a rolling release of the most recent versions of all official apps? Technically, the distribution version has no meaning whatsoever. Its primary and only reason is marketing, because we can sell it as something big and new with a fancy code name. What would all that mean for our milestone planning? Would we track milestones separately per app agian, or set common targets for the default distribution like we do now? @all Opinions?

nik commented

2021-03-03 10:00:37 +01:00

(Migrated from edugit.org)

@all Not a single reaction within one week is a bit poor. Please provide your thoughts.

fph commented

2021-03-03 12:07:47 +01:00

(Migrated from edugit.org)

Apparently, either there is no opinion worth formulating or there is a lack of time and prioritisation for the topic (non-technical!). Let's discuss the topic at the dev meeting.

nik commented

2021-03-05 17:39:22 +01:00

(Migrated from edugit.org)

assigned to @nik

nik commented

2021-03-19 17:31:40 +01:00

(Migrated from edugit.org)

Dev meeting decision follows initial comment. Next release is 2021.06.

nik (Migrated from edugit.org) closed this issue

2021-03-19 17:31:40 +01:00

No milestone

No project

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference

aleksis/AlekSIS#19

No description provided.

Rows
Columns