rspec users - Oct 2007 - Rspec Release Plan (was Am I missing something with Heckle?)

On Oct 31, 2007 11:36 AM, Scott Taylor <mailing_lists at railsnewbie.com>
wrote:
> When can we expect the next release of rspec?
Definitely by the end of November.
Likely by mid-November.
Hopefully in a matter of days.

The next release will be 1.1.0.

We''re going to a release model in which 1.odd.x will be considered
experimental. This means that while we will document code-breaking
changes in subsequent releases (so you know what to do to move
forward), we will not commit to backwards compatibility to these
releases.

When we''re ready to commit to a given API, we''ll release
1.2.0. After
that we will be committed to backwards compatibility to 1.2.x (which
will implicitly remain compatible with 1.0.x).

Hope that all makes sense. This will give us the best opportunity to
get features out early with an understanding that they are subject to
change, while still allowing people who choose not to absorb that risk
to get features as they become less volatile.

Cheers,
David

On Oct 31, 2007, at 4:53 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:
> We''re going to a release model in which 1.odd.x will be considered
> experimental. This means that while we will document code-breaking
> changes in subsequent releases (so you know what to do to move
> forward), we will not commit to backwards compatibility to these
> releases.

I''ve always been puzzled by this way of handling beta releases, which  
quite a few open source projects follow.  What''s the thinking behind a
1.odd, 1.even pattern, as opposed to offering 1.x and trunk?  (It''s  
not hard to fetch trunk and build a custom gem - I''ve got a seven line
script that does everything, including the TMBundle.)
> When we''re ready to commit to a given API, we''ll release
1.2.0. After
> that we will be committed to backwards compatibility to 1.2.x (which
> will implicitly remain compatible with 1.0.x).
If 1.1 introduces breaking changes, but 1.2 is backwards-compatible  
with 1.0, what happens to the API changes that appear in 1.1?

Ashley


-- 
blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/
linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
currently @ home

On Oct 31, 2007, at 11:56 AM, Ashley Moran wrote:
>
> On Oct 31, 2007, at 4:53 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>> We''re going to a release model in which 1.odd.x will be
considered
>> experimental. This means that while we will document code-breaking
>> changes in subsequent releases (so you know what to do to move
>> forward), we will not commit to backwards compatibility to these
>> releases.
>
>
> I''ve always been puzzled by this way of handling beta releases,
which
> quite a few open source projects follow.  What''s the thinking
behind a
> 1.odd, 1.even pattern, as opposed to offering 1.x and trunk? 
(It''s
> not hard to fetch trunk and build a custom gem - I''ve got a seven
line
> script that does everything, including the TMBundle.)
>
Can I get that! That sounds nice... (probably simpler than i think)
>> When we''re ready to commit to a given API, we''ll
release 1.2.0. After
>> that we will be committed to backwards compatibility to 1.2.x (which
>> will implicitly remain compatible with 1.0.x).
>
> If 1.1 introduces breaking changes, but 1.2 is backwards-compatible
> with 1.0, what happens to the API changes that appear in 1.1?
>
> Ashley
>
>
> -- 
> blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/
> linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
> currently @ home
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

On Oct 31, 2007 1:56 PM, Ashley Moran <work at ashleymoran.me.uk>
wrote:
> I''ve always been puzzled by this way of handling beta releases,
which
> quite a few open source projects follow.  What''s the thinking
behind a
> 1.odd, 1.even pattern, as opposed to offering 1.x and trunk?
Interestingly enough, there is another thread today expressing
dissatisfaction with 1.x and trunk. Can''t please everybody :)

On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:33 pm, Jim Deville wrote:
> Can I get that! That sounds nice... (probably simpler than i think)

Sure, this is all there is to it:

   2> ~/Documents/Development/bdd % cat update-rspec-gem.sh
   #!/usr/bin/env bash

   cd ~/Documents/Development/bdd/rspec-trunk
   svn update
   cd rspec
   rake clobber
   rake package
   sudo gem install pkg/*.gem
   svn update "~/Library/Application Support/TextMate/Pristine Copy/ 
Bundles/RSpec.tmbundle"

Note it assumes your RSpec.tmbundle is checked out of trunk, and not  
either the MacroMates repository or the CURRENT tag, or something else.

Ashley


-- 
blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/
linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
currently @ home

On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:46 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:
> Interestingly enough, there is another thread today expressing
> dissatisfaction with 1.x and trunk. Can''t please everybody :)
You could always do what Rails does and offer a beta gem repository,  
so you can install with --source ?  That way you keep the numbering  
uninterrupted and still offer a pre-built latest version.

Ashley


-- 
blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/
linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
currently @ home