On 01/29/2013 05:58 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak@redhat.com> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 6:57:51 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:41:13 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/29/2013 04:52 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:44:33 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/21/2013 09:45 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 01/21/2013 10:28 AM, Omer Frenkel wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >> To: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> >> Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com>, >> engine-devel@ovirt.org >> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:27:36 AM >> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> >>> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> >>> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org >>> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:24:58 PM >>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? >>> >>> On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote: >>>> Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to >>>> 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT >>>> in >>>> the master branch: >>> >>> +1 >> I agree, and this is not the only place where should start >> marking > > and cluster compatibility version..
all above is true, but Juan meant preparing MVN infra for the next development iteration, while you're talking about engine internals, maybe we should file BZs on that (as next version tasks) or should we define new process of preparing for the next version that will include both?
As I don't see hard opposition to this change I will merge it tomorrow. Please raise your hand iif you think it shouldn't be merged.
For the poms, why didn't you use a variable that is inherited? But Java is not my domain.
Maven doesn't support use of variables in any of the coordinates of the artifacts or of their parents. If you use variables, specially if you use them in the "version" of the parent project and the variable is inherited from the parent project, there is no way to determine which version of the parent project should be used.
That's correct, but you can set the version numbers of the ovirt artifacts to ${parent.version}. But let's do it in a next patch, we already spent enough time on this :) Merge!
It this is correct, there is no point in merge and fix. Fix and merge.
"${parent.version}" is the default value for "version" when there is a parent, and we don't override it in any of our projects.
Tarball should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0_master.tar.gz RPM release should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0-0.0.master
This will enable us to release milestones, such as beta1, beta2, rc1, rc2 and finally release without suffix.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.