I personally don't think semver really did fix anything in ruby-land (but thats my opinion). Ruby has a crummy package system.The only one worse is Pythons.
Anyhow, I added a little bit about our releases in the wiki [1] and a much longer post to the phonegap blog [2] to help folks better understand the rational. To echo Fil, I don't think we have the luxury of knowing when something breaks given the cat and mouse nature of the project relationship to mobile operating system vendors. [1] http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CuttingReleases [2] http://phonegap.com/2012/04/12/rolling-releases-how-apache-cordova-becomes-phonegap-and-why/ On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Mike Reinstein <reinstein.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > I certainly don't meant to rehash something that has been discussed > ad-nauseam. Nor am I advocating we change how often we release. I think the > key distinction is picking a version number that indicates breaking change, > compatible changes/new features, vs patches. Semantic versioning provides a > clean way to do specify this. In npm and ruby land, this has largely fixed > dependency hell, and has led to more reliable code re-use. > > Just a thought. > > http://semver.org > > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> This discussion again :) >> >> http://apache.markmail.org/thread/l2et3r5v35efprgd >> >> >> With a point release coming out every month or so that limits us to being >> able to "break" things every 10 months or so. With changing SDKs (see iOS >> 4.2, 5, and 6) sometimes we need to break things, like, asap. >> >> Other times we break things because we are assholes (from our users' point >> of view, at least :P ) >> >> On 10/3/12 2:21 PM, "Mike Reinstein" <reinstein.m...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >I'm wondering if anyone else has given thought towards adopting semantic >> >versioning for our releases. In terms of making plugin development and >> >version adoption less painful, this might be a good move. Thoughts? >> > >> >-Mike >> >>
