Lukas, The general rule is that we are not releasing unstable versions so it is generally safe and good to upgrade to lasted version.
The 3.x means that the plugin is compatible with Maven 3.x (if you see 2.x than it should work with Maven 3. But it was released when the reference Maven version was 2.x) The Mx suffix is only an internal version to the dev team of Maven. We mean that it is a milestone in a sense that we would have wanted to deliver a feature that is not implemented completely yet. You should care about that only of you write extensions that depend of that specific plugin. We are usually cutting versions only from the master branch and the master branch is continuously tested against a big matrix of OSs, Maven versions and Java version. I hope that helps Enrico Il Sab 3 Ott 2020, 09:30 <[email protected]> ha scritto: > Hi All & Maven Devs > > > > My name is Lukas, I'm a software engineer working at some very little > company located in Switzerland (called Quatico). > > I wanted to let you know that the versioning that is used in (as far as I > can see) all Maven Plugins (e.g. Apache Maven Install Plugin 3.0.0-M1) is > very confusing <to the world>. > > I can see on the corresponding Website (e.g. > https://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-install-plugin/download.cgi ) the > these milestone releases are declared to be stable. > > > > My company did not upgrade plugin versions basically for some years now > because (when just seeing the version itself) decided "Nope, its only a > milestone, thus not stable". > > So in contrast to the maven plugin versions, the community is pretty clear > about what x.y.z-M1 means: It's a pre-release for early testing purposes > (e.g. see you "partner" projects explanation for it here > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning ). > > > > I don't want to complain (I now know the versions are stable) but the usage > of your new version would probably pike much quicker around the work if you > followed the "regular" versioning scheme. > > Why use the Major part (3), then completely ignoring Minor (always 0) and > Patch (always 0 as well) parts, to then fall back to Milestones? I cannot > see an advantage in it. > > > > Hope the input might help! > > > > Cheers > > Lukas > > > >
