Please consider tagging formal release about ice4j HOT 11 CLOSED

I've released the current version of ice4j as 1.0 on Maven Central and it is tagged as that in Git. The next major/minor version will likely be when ice-lite is complete.

from ice4j.

May I ask where/for whom you are packaging ice4j?

from ice4j.

I'm not working on packaging (yet), I've just noticed that Ice4j is a prospective software for Debian as there is an RFP bug.
Anyway Software versioning is useful for number of reasons unrelated to packaging...

from ice4j.

I know this RFP and I'm working on it. The problem is the dependency on JAIN-SIP.

from ice4j.

So what about versioning? And what's wrong with JAIN-SIP?

from ice4j.

None of the Jitsi projects (except for Jitsi itself) ever had a proper versioning scheme. They all just get 1.0.build-number. I'm not in control over this.

The javax.sip and javax.sdp packages of JAIN-SIP have a non-free license and thus cannot enter Debian. Search the dev mailing-list for details.

from ice4j.

Thanks. I can't find anything relevant... If sip/sdp support is pluggable then maybe jain-sip don't have to be in Debian? Or perhaps it could go to "non-free" section...

from ice4j.

http://lists.jitsi.org/pipermail/dev/2015-November/025617.html

from ice4j.

Thank you very much for context and all the best with the plan.

from ice4j.

Thanks. :) Please consider semantic versioning:

• http://semver.org/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning
• Debian Upstream Guide

from ice4j.

Perhaps it is unnecessary to include ice4j- pat into tags. Just numbers and dots are fine.

from ice4j.