Github release feature

[thelastinuit]

What was the consensus on using github release feature? I was thinking of semantic versioning and I recalled the github feature. I think @kurenn said it was more appropriate for gems but still.

[kurenn]

According to our meeting, we should include this process, into this type of projects, whether they are open source or not:

1. Plugins(sepomex-js)
2. Frameworks(alom)
3. Gems(pager-api)
4. Engines(acts_as_user)

Am I missing something @vovimayhem ?

[kurenn]

We can use something like this - https://keepachangelog.com/en/0.3.0/ -

Provided by @thelastinuit

[thelastinuit]

@kurenn i'll create the issue on each aforementioned project then.

[vovimayhem]

@kurenn That list makes sense.

• There is just one deployment? (Is it a site? is it a service?) - Don't Use Semantic Versioning
• Will it be distributed as a package? (npm? rubygems? a binary? an installer?) - Use versioning... SemVer or CalVer

[vovimayhem]

I've used Calendar Versioning for tagging by deployments (i.e. the tags and docker images)... but I always end up falling back again to using the :latest tag. I feel adopting any kind of versioning on mono-deployment projects to be a ridiculous overkill.

[kurenn]

Thanks for sharing @vovimayhem !

@thelastinuit I would appreciate that. Once you are done creating the issues, would you be so kind and close this issue?

[thelastinuit]

@kurenn sure thing. @vovimayhem just for gems, I think.

[thelastinuit]

@kurenn done. I think there are more IL gems/js thingies to add this but I'm guessing you have your reasons to choose those ones.

[kurenn]

We can keep add them, I just want to make sure Jarvis is something that includes or provides code that has been tested a lot by us or the community, so it actually deliver the value we want