accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Semantic Versioning
Date Fri, 05 Dec 2014 18:46:29 GMT
It would be helpful to this thread, if we can get some informal votes on
the following propositions:

[ ]: adopt semver 2.0.0 (http://semver.org)
[ ]: adopt additional strictness to require documenting deprecation for at
least 1 major release before possible to consider in the next major release
[ ]: adopt additional strictness to ensure forward compatibility between
bugfix releases
[ ]: start operating under whatever rules we adopt as of the master branch
[ ]: keep the master branch named 1.7.0
[ ]: define scope of these versioning compatibility rules to  be our
current definition of "public API" and the wire version

I'm going to assume it's a given that if any exceptional situations arise,
we'll handle those through further discussions/voting, as appropriate.


--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:

> Christopher wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 1:41 PM,<dlmarion@comcast.net>  wrote:
>>
>>  >  +1 to semver
>>> >  +1 to 1 major release before removing deprecated items
>>> >  +1 to forward compatibility between bugfix releases
>>> >
>>> >  What's the version # for the master branch if these rules are applied?
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>> Well, I'd say1.7  still, since it is consistent with our existing rules
>> for
>> determining a "major" releasetoday,  *and*  it matches semver definition
>> of
>> a "minor" release, because it doesn't break backwards-compatibility
>> compatibility from1.6  (with one tiny exception of dropping
>> Instance.getConfiguration()... because it was an exceptional situation
>> discussed in previous threads; if people are uncomfortable with that
>> exception, I can return it to the API, if it helps achieve consensus
>> here).
>>
>>
> Sounds right to me.
>
> When we actually have code to land in Apache for 2.0.0, I figured we'd
> break 1.7.X off to branch named "1.7" and master would become 2.0.0. We can
> have some feature branch in Apache off to the side to make sure 2.0.0
> development can happen in a shared environment before making the above
> switch.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message