On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 10:34 AM, James Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
> The original intent of the 4.0 branch was meant to host all 4.x > releases. In general releases are compatible in the following manner: > - a minor release must be deployed first on the server and then at any > point later on the client. It will require a rolling restart, but no > downtime. > - a patch release may be deployed on the client and server in either > order. If the patch requires the server jar to be deployed (which > would likely be most of the time), it will require a rolling restart > and no downtime will be required. > - a major release may require downtime, as it may require the client > and server side to both be deployed together. > If you like I could make an alternate proposal to rename the branches to branch-4 (and branch-3), then. Having a branch named '4.0' that builds releases 4.1.x is bound to confuse, IMHO. -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
