I think this depends on what we decide to do about MRUNIT-138. We were discussing an incompatible change, and if we do decide to do that I think the version number should increase to 1.0.0 to reflect this (and also the fact that this is the first version since graduation).
If we later go ahead with the API rewrite (MRUNIT-69), this could form MRUnit 2.0.0! Would line up nicely with Hadoop's own numbering strategy ;) On 7 September 2012 07:54, James Kinley <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for the 1.0.0 release. I think it's a good idea to increase the major > version number considering the recent graduation and the included changes. > > On 7 Sep 2012, at 07:29, "Wei, Jianbin" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > My bad, 0.9.0 --> 0.10.0 is also version increase. My eyes are not used > to have a 2 digits minor version yet. However, I still prefer a one-digit > minor version as most software do that in practice. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- Jianbin > > > > On Sep 6, 2012, at 10:41 PM, Bertrand Dechoux wrote: > > > > I am not sure to understand "It is not good to backtracking version.". > > Does it mean that the version after graduating should show the 'step'? > > Is that a common way to do it? > > > > Not taking into account the graduation, I would also favor the "0.10.0" > > instead of "1.0.0". > > > > Regards > > > > Bertrand > > >
