On 07/04/17 11:26, Osma Suominen wrote:
05.04.2017, 20:32, Andy Seaborne kirjoitti:
If we have a 3.x.0/clocktick style, maybe we can better evolve more
easily - removing deprecations for example.
What do you mean by clocktick style? Do you mean the .0/.1/.0/.1 style
that has been followed recently (until 3.3.0 which will break the
pattern) or the opposite where most/all releases are just 3.x.0?
Our general level of stability/compatibility would be just as strong as
has been.
So far:
3.0.0, 3.0.1, 3.1.0, 3.1.1, 3.2.0, 3.3.0
2.11 even got to 2.11.2.
We can only do 3.x.1 if everything is 3.x.1.
I think there are two options:
1. Make an explicit strategy of alternating between .0 and .1 releases.
Big changes can only go into .0 releases, while .1 releases are reserved
for non-intrusive fixes.
2. Generally do only x.x.0 releases. However, if a "brown paper bag"
issue comes up soon after a release, we could still do a .1 to fix just
that specific issue.
I like 2. more than 1. because it allows more freedom for subsystems to
evolve on their own.
+1 to (2)
That is what I was getting at.
This makes our work as decoupled/asynchronous as possible.
This is not a big change. We have fallen into x.y.1 but I think because
that is what maven release plugin defaults to, no other reason.
A (3) is two branches - dev and maintenance each with releases. Given
we are people-time-limited, I feel that's not viable.
-Osma
Andy
