On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@gmail.com> wrote:
I have been giving some thought to skipping GeoTools 3.

GeoServer would like to make a release, just have we released 2.7.0.  Our numbering is getting in the way as we have no good number left over for "patch" releases. It also does not match our release practice with respect to api change.
I don't understand. What is the problem? Are you saying that releasing 2.7.1 would not indicate a patch release? Afaik we never have stuck we don;t have a policy on version numbers with respect to api changes. Often a change in patch version comes with api changes.  

This entire project was started as GeoTools "2"; we have already dropped "2" from our website, our jars (they used to be gt2-main), etc...

With this in mind:
- I would like to issue a 7.0.1 release - with patch releases not being worthy of a release announcement.
Ahh ok, i see what you are getting at now :) Yeah this makes sense. The two is pretty much meaningless. The only down side is recognition from users. And yeah as Michael notes we could easily just add a 4th number to also solve this.

A slightly sillier option is:
- Release GeoTools 5.7.1 (matching Java 5). With a GeoTools 6.0.0 starting up when Java 6 is the minimum requirement.
Hmmm... not a big fan of this option personally. I don't see much of a benefit to following java versions... especially since we lag so far behind what is the current stable java release.

I am willing to write up a proposal to this effect; but would like to give a chance for the admin list to shoot the idea down in flames first.

Jody Garnett

Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself;
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf

Geotools-administration mailing list

Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.