https://forum.jogamp.org/Re-incorrect-files-in-stable-release-tp2399074p2407108.html
comment inline..
>
> On Wednesday, February 02, 2011 17:33:10 Michael Bien [via jogamp] wrote:
>> Hi Wade,
>>
>> On 02/02/2011 04:28 AM, Wade Walker [via jogamp] wrote:
>>> Speaking of which, is it ever a good idea for JOGL web start users to point
>>> to
http://jogamp.org/deployment/webstart/ in their JNLP files? It seems like
>>> this just creates the possibility of their app breaking whenever the newest
>>> JOGL changes something, with their local JARs staying the same.
>> good question :)
>>
>> as Sven already mentioned: we have two webstart folders,
>> one for major releases and one for early access stuff (random builds).
>>
>> Imagine it would be a maven repository. Its ok for testing when you
>> always take the latest version but for production you may have the
>> requirement to build from a internal maven repo against fixed/known
>> dependency versions (speak hosting the libs on your own server).
>>
>> But you could still decide to link to our server (balls of steel as
>> precondition) which is absolutely fine since we can host every
>> incompatible version under a different namespace.
>>
>> lets say JOGL 2 is released and we do a jogamp bundle.. we may host all
>> subsequent updates as
>> /webstart-2.0 as long we don't break compatibility.
>> If we break compatibility we just add another folder (e.g /webstart-2.5).
> yup .. discussed this with Michael and we will change to this idea a bit
> to provide stable API<major.minor> binaries.
>
>> Developers could use the bleeding edge webstart-next for demos and
>> testing since they can live with the risk that it can break anytime.
>>
>> The deployment isn't finished yet and we agreed to don't loose to much
>> time with it before 2.0... we can always optimize it later.
> yup
>
> if nobody has any concerns, we may move over to 'webstart-2.0' right away.
>
> the policy for such a webstart-<version> folder will be as follows:
>
> - while 2.0 is being in development (RC stuff) - things can happen (API)
>
> - after 2.0 the API shall be stable / frozen and only fixes will follow up,
> which is very unlikely since we kind of agreed to a forward development.
>
> we may continue 'webstart' reflecting the lastest webstart-<version> one
> for your bleeding edge stable convenience - wow .. another release thing :)
builds from master branch. All webstart-x.y releases should be promoted
manually anyway IMO.
(signed or not... i don't have a strong opinion on that)