[cle-release-team] Versioning JIRA components

[Sam Ottenhoff]

Do others think it makes sense to do this a few chunks at a time, or should
we wait for someone to propose the mega-move to 4.0?

My proposal from last week's call was to move Search, Polls, Mailsender,
and ShortURL back into the main SAK project... I believe they should all
have versions < 2.9 so they could lose their indie status without
versioning problems.

--Sam


On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Aaron Zeckoski <azeckoski at unicon.net>wrote:

> 4.0.0? What about the build number? 4.0.0.0 at least.
>
> On a more serious note, I think we should probably take it in steps
> but it maybe getting a few of these squished back into the main core
> would be a good starting point (current versions be damned).
>
> -AZ
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Noah Botimer <botimer at umich.edu> wrote:
> > Doesn't this all boil down to an incomplete modularization? We said
> somewhere along the line that a bunch of things were going to fly solo and
> version themselves, and that there were teams that wanted this
> responsibility/flexibility.
> >
> > As far as I can tell, we've only really treated Profile 2 and LTI like
> that (where the team motors on and tells us what minor version should be
> packed for a given release, and we're not [CLE team, MT, core people,
> whatever] left to track more disparate things and check more boxes).
> Everything else just revs with the core releases (maybe msgcntr and
> lessonbuilder are between worlds) and folks like Sam are left holding the
> bag and cleaning it all up.
> >
> > Without a reasonably centralized, authoritative, and browseable map of
> dependencies between a core release version and modules, this is all just
> too much work. I do not consider 376 POM files to be worthy of any of the
> above adjectives.
> >
> > I think we have to decide which world we want to live in and make it
> happen. Either there are module owners who rev and pin their module version
> to the next release or there aren't. Nearly a hundred core modules living
> at some unknown point on that spectrum with no decent tool to manage it is
> a bankrupt position.
> >
> > I personally think we should declare module bankruptcy, fold 90% of our
> stuff together, version it 4.0.0, and have a barbecue. There will be plenty
> of recoverable salary dollars to have quite a party.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Noah
> >
> > On Mar 14, 2013, at 11:43 AM, Aaron Zeckoski wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah, I don't see any way to version components in our JIRA either...
> >> Looks like it isn't coming soon either
> >> -AZ
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Sam Ottenhoff <
> ottenhoff at longsight.com> wrote:
> >>> On the call this morning, it was mentioned that JIRA components could
> now be
> >>> versioned separately.  For example, a "Polls" component could be
> marked as
> >>> Fixed for 1.4.0 while a JIRA with "Assignments" component could be
> marked as
> >>> Fixed for 2.9.0.
> >>>
> >>> I still see this as an Open feature request in the Atlassian JIRA:
> >>>
> >>>  https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRA-3501
> >>>
> >>> Does anyone know differently?
> >>>
> >>> --Sam
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> cle-release-team mailing list
> >>> cle-release-team at collab.sakaiproject.org
> >>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cle-release-team
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Aaron Zeckoski - Software Architect - http://tinyurl.com/azprofile
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cle-release-team mailing list
> >> cle-release-team at collab.sakaiproject.org
> >> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cle-release-team
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Aaron Zeckoski - Software Architect - http://tinyurl.com/azprofile
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/cle-release-team/attachments/20130318/e1afbf7b/attachment-0006.html