[oslc-core] OSLC specification version numbering guidance

[Jim des Rivieres]

I lean towards #2. If each domain spec starts at 1.0, the version numbers 
can reflect the maturity level of that domain.



From:
Steve K Speicher <sspeiche at us.ibm.com>
To:
oslc-core at open-services.net
Date:
01/10/2012 05:14 PM
Subject:
[oslc-core] OSLC specification version numbering guidance
Sent by:
oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net



As new specifications are being developed (and possibly new working groups 

on the horizon), I wanted to get a basic policy in place regarding spec 
version numbers.

Here are some alternatives:

#1 Coordinate numbers across all domains

Set guidance that a WG spec will match its version number with "nearest" 
Core version number that it is based off of.
If there is a need for minor spec update before next major version number, 

using n.0 and then n.1.  Take a concrete example, say a spec (Automation) 
starts now and is based on Core 2.0, it will be Automation 2.0.

#2 Provide loose guidance, workgroups can start at 1.0

State that if it is truelly the first, then just call it such.  Take 
example above, you'll have Automation 1.0 based on Core 2.0.

#3 Say nothing

I'm in favor #1, stating it as guidance and not a hard rule. 

Are there any concerns with this type of guidance? 
Does anyone have a recommendation other than #1?

Thanks,
Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645


_______________________________________________
Oslc-Core mailing list
Oslc-Core at open-services.net
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net