> I think the extra statement we have to make is that only the latest minor version of the next major branch > is guaranteed have all the improvements of the previous major branch.Or phrased in other words: > Improvements that are not bug fixes will only go into the x.y.0 minor version, but not (by default anyway, > the RM should use good judgment) into any existing minor version (and thus not in a patch version > 0)
I think that's a fine statement. I don't know if it's worth doing, but we could say in each minor release's notes what the minimum minor release in the next major version is needed to get a superset of functionality. This would only really impact Andrew right now since all the 1.y.0 versions would be "2.0". On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 8:47 AM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks Andy. > I think the gist of the discussion boils down to this:We generally have > two goals: (1) follow semver from 1.0.0 onward and (2) avoid losing > features/improvements when upgrading from an older version to a newer one. > Turns out these two are conflicting unless we follow certain additional > policies. > The issue at hand was a performance improvement that we added to 0.98, > 1.3.0, and 2.0.0, but not 1.0.x, 1.1.x, and 1.2.x (x >= 1 in all cases)So > when somebody would upgrade from 0.98 to (say) 1.1.7 (if/when that's out) > that improvement would "silently" be lost. > I think the extra statement we have to make is that only the latest minor > version of the next major branch is guaranteed have all the improvements of > the previous major branch.Or phrased in other words: Improvements that are > not bug fixes will only go into the x.y.0 minor version, but not (by > default anyway, the RM should use good judgment) into any existing minor > version (and thus not in a patch version > 0) > > If that's OK with everybody we can just state that and move on (and I'll > shut up :) ). > -- Lars > > From: Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <dev@hbase.apache.org> > Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 8:58 AM > Subject: 0.98 patch acceptance criteria discussion > > Hi devs, > > I'd like to call your attention to an interesting and important discussion > taking place on the tail of HBASE-12596. It starts from here: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12596?focusedCommentId=14628295&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14628295 > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) > > > > -- Sean
