I love the thoughtful discussion. I am in favour of (b), because that is the "general understanding" of Semantic Versioning.
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 6:14 PM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com> wrote: > Interesting points, reminds me of this thread: > https://github.com/semver/semver/issues/411#issuecomment-347050750 😄 > > > Some comments / suggestions from the commenters on that post which I find > interesting (both of which support one or the other option we are > discussing). > > 1) > Use BREAKING.FEATURE.PATCH instead of MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH. > > 2) > To me, a MAJOR version bump means "either I broke something or I really > want you to pay attention." > > Regards, > Kaxil > > > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021, 01:51 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > >> Very slight preference for b) for the marketing value but a) has some >> nice properties too and if we have enough support for a) I would also >> follow "remove deprecated features only". >> >> I do not think we break semver with a) : https://semver.org/. Major >> version MAY (but not MUST) include minor and patch level changes. So it is >> up to us what we decide. >> >> Major version X (X.y.z | X > 0) MUST be incremented if any backwards >> incompatible changes are introduced to the public API. It *MAY* also >> include minor and patch level changes. Patch and minor version MUST be >> reset to 0 when major version is incremented. >> >> J. >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 7:41 PM Tomasz Urbaszek <turbas...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> I'm also in favor of *b)*. >>> >>> If we expect that new features may confuse users then maybe we should >>> adopt a rule that when a feature is introduced it is protected by the >>> feature flag and is not enabled by default. Of course this may not always >>> be possible or may create even more confusion. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Tomek >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 09:22, Deng Xiaodong <xd.den...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> To me it should be *(b)*, especially given we intend to follow SemVar. >>>> >>>> People would have specific expectations on MAJOR/MINOR/PATCH >>>> <https://semver.org/#summary> if we claim SemVar is followed. *(a)* >>>> would cause confusion in such context. >>>> >>>> >>>> XD >>>> >>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 12:43 AM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I personally would vote for *(b) Contain new features as well as the >>>>> removal of deprecated features *as otherwise, it does not feel like >>>>> it is a major release to me. >>>>> >>>>> A major release to me is where we add new features of significant >>>>> values as we did with Airflow 2.0.0. >>>>> This is also good in terms of marketing where blog posts and video >>>>> posts (talks in conferences) can talk about *what's new in 3.0.0? *instead >>>>> of 3.1 or 3.2 >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Kaxil >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 11:41 PM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> As part of documenting all the guidelines including (PR here >>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14674>) but not limited to >>>>>> Release, I would like to start the discussion on one of the things that >>>>>> was >>>>>> recently discussed: >>>>>> >>>>>> *What should the major version like 3.0.0 / 4.0.0 contain?* >>>>>> a) Only removal of deprecated features to ease the migration for users >>>>>> b) Contain new features as well as removal of deprecated features >>>>>> >>>>>> Also Note: from Airflow 2.0.0, we intend to follow SemVer ( >>>>>> https://semver.org/) >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Kaxil >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> >> -- >> +48 660 796 129 >> >
