topic Alfresco Release numbering in Alfresco Archive

Alfresco Release numbering

loftux — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 07:08:37 GMT

I would like Alfresco starting from 3.3 release-Use an intuitive release numbering scheme.-Avoid marketing labels in the release numbering.Why?Alfresco has a history of very confusing release numbering. I kind of hope that after LABS confusion, 3.2 would make things clear again. But then came commun

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

pmyers — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:24:07 GMT

I believe that the 3.2r includes records management module which was not included in the 3.2 release. The community 3.2r2 I believe was a upgrade from supporting CMIS .61 to CMIS 1.0 Committee Draft 04.

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

loftux — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:32:18 GMT

pmyers, you are correct, it was the records management release, hence the r. But as I was saying, it is kind of confusing to know which is/was the latest one.
Community 3.3 is released, and shortly there will be a 3.3G release. Why will it be named G?
If not using number, why will the release not be name 3.3 A, 3.3 B and so on in a more intuitive way.

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

mwildam — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 07:59:13 GMT

I was interpreting the r as "revision" - so r2 as revision 2. :-]

So I can sign that version numbering is confusing.

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

mrogers — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:43:21 GMT

+1 that its confusing. The battle for sensible release numbers was won for one brief moment at the end of the Labs releases and then lost again.     I'm loosing the will to live…

Its best not to read too much into the community version numbers, they are not consistent and have never "meant" anything, in particular nothing to do with "alpha quality" etc.

If there are words that should be added to the release notes then please add them or if its one of the few pages that are locked then post your content here and I'll add it for you.

As far as I'm concerned 3.2r should have been 3.3. :?
I don't know what the 3.2 r2 "stood" for.   What it was was was an update of community 3.2 r with an update to the CMIS interfaces to version 1.0.   It also had some fixes from 3.2 Enterprise.
3.3 is the community 3.3 release.
3.3 G will have new functionality for "Google Docs" (The G is for Google) and it will have a few more bug fixes.

After that its 3.4.

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

jpotts — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:18:38 GMT

Wow. G for "Google Docs". That is truly annoying.

+1 for a rational, predictable, marketing-free Community release numbering scheme.

Jeff

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

jpfi — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:59:43 GMT

hi,
why not 3.3.1 instead of 3.3G?
cheers,
jan

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

nancyg — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 15:47:50 GMT

Guys -

Thanks for the input on release numbers. I'll make sure that the team who is in charge of naming/numbering releases gets the feedback.

Nancy

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

elibra — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 08:03:37 GMT

+1 that its confusing.
Marketing announcements go faster than release builds
and users are confused expecting its availability in current release.
-(for example being impresed by marketing news like google docs integration or custom lists… )

Suggestion:

What if include more information in Release notes?
- SVN revision number , build number ?

e.g. "Release Version: Community - v3.3.0 (2765), SVN Revision #19754"


As build number is usually shown in System Information of Alfresco Explorrer Administration console:

Version: Community - v3.3.0 (2765)

Repository Properties:
Property   Value
Installed Schema   3300
Installed Version   3.2.0 (r2 2440)
Server Schema   4009
Server Version   3.3.0 (2765)

what do you think?

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

heiko_robert — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 09:28:27 GMT

+1 for a consistent and more clear numbering.
+10 for elibra's suggestion
In the past the svn rev # were stated in the release notes. but for 3.4c it's missing again
It would be very helpful if you just put a small text file into every release with all the numbers…

@PM: it would be very helpful if your naming scheme reflects common best practice in (final) releases. For now I read:
3.4.a: early alpha, just for testing, don't use
3.4.b: beta software, nice to try but still known issues and not ready for dayly use
3.4.c: ??? At least a note about the status of work would be nice…
Come on guys, be brave and define a release if you think you're ready and respect common release numbering rules!

Thanks
Heiko

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

mrogers — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 10:49:52 GMT

This is implementation of "clear numbering" as per the blog posting from Alfresco Marketing and the feedback taken on from last year.

Your understanding of the a, b, c, d is incorrect. They are just version numbers. In particular a is not "alpha" and b is not "beta".

Community releases have letters. Enterprise releases have numbers.

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

heiko_robert — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 11:36:13 GMT

Hi Mark,
thanks to point that out. Unfortunately there is no hint in the release numbers or release notes about

svn rev.

prerelease or release

in this version (3.4.c) the README.txt states: *** Unsupported prerelease ****
does this mean there will be a real release one time or is this the new default statement for community?
We all know that there is a good reason for most software components to realease prereleases and final releases and I think we both could agree that Alfresco 3.4.a - b are not final releases, right?
Of course it's your decission not to make any final release in the community version but if you intend to do so it would help to let us know 😉

Thanks
Heiko

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

mrogers — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 20:09:12 GMT

I can see the svn details on:
http://wiki.alfresco.com/wiki/Alfresco_Community_3.4.c_Release_Notes

Re: Alfresco Release numbering

heiko_robert — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 22:10:42 GMT

Hi Mark,
thx you're right - my fault. I might hit the wrong page (http://wiki.alfresco.com/wiki/Alfresco_Community_3.4.c).
Heiko