hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From William Speirs <wspe...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecated code policy
Date Fri, 23 Nov 2012 13:39:24 GMT
My vote is for #2.

Thanks!

Bill-


On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 2012-11-23 at 08:18 +0000, James Abley wrote:
> > I don't know if you can use semantic versioning [1], or if apache
> projects
> > have a different way of defining major / minor / point version changes?
> >
> > [1] http://semver.org/
> >
>
> ...
>
> >
> > On 23 November 2012 00:00, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > If we wish to support Spring we still have to maintain strict binary
> > > compatibility within a given package name and associated AID.
> > >
> > > > policy in this regard and stick to it we will be acting responsibly
> > > > enough given the existing project constraints.
> > >
> > > The policy also has to be workable within the likely usage scenarios.
> > >
> > > For example, for JMeter it would be fine to drop deprecated methods
> > > after a couple of releases, but AFAICT that is not the case for
> > > Spring.
> > > There's no guarantee that all the Spring components can be upgraded
> > > within a given release time-frame - or indeeed ever -so breaks in
> > > compatibilty must be accompanied by a change in package name/AID.
> > >
>
> @Sebastian
>
> All right. So be it.
>
> @James
>
> Given the outcome of this discussion the versioning policy we de facto
> have in HC is equivalent to the semantic versioning described in the
> document with very minor deviations (x.y-alpha1 instead of x.y.z-alpha1
> and so on).
>
> Oleg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>
>

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