Hi, > > I strongly disagree. Since I joined the project the FreeCol project, > > the minor version has only changed when we make an incompatible change to > > the save game format, in the sense of no longer being able to import games > > written by the previous minor version. ATM we still support the 0.10.x > > format, so there is no urgency to bump the minor version. Furthermore we > > have recent valid bug reports with 0.10.x-originated games attached, so > > there may be user impact to consider. > Your view is definitely the other side of the coin. If FreeCol is using the > SemVar version schema, > breaking API (or in this case save game files), wouldn't matter in beta. If > not (and FreeCol uses > its own version schema), then that what you're saying is fine. > > My view on the matter is that the jump from 0.10.3 to now is so big that it > "deserves" a minor point bump > on that alone. TBH, it's not that big of a deal.
IIRC, as I understood the project documentation the number can be changed on new features and is not held back by the compatibility. There is just the rule that compatibility for *at least* the prior minor version should be provided. If the compatibility can be kept for longer, like 3 versions, its even better. So we can go 12.0 to signify additional features (like its done everywhere) and, if we like to, declare in the release notes we keep 0.10.x compatibility for the 0.12.x series. As we are not many people I thought it would be nice to cut down on cruft, but I don't insist on removing the code, as you say its not that bad, Mike. Btw., the reason for the 0.10.7 bug report is slow updates there: https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=freecol And there are many other distributions using their packages. So yeah, it might be better to keep 0.10.7 compatibility, as its too late for Jessie. Getting them to put a newer version in testing/unstable would still be nice, as many probably use them to be somewhat more up to date. > > >[Caleb] > > > FreeCol should take advantage of any features of Java 1.7 that it can. We already had 2 incidences of accidentally using a 1.8 method and it took a quite long time until someone complained, so one could guess not many are still using 1.7. It seems Oracle alrready stopped providing public updates to 1.7 in April? http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/documentation/eol-135779.html Is there anything in 1.8 that would be useful for us someday? Greetings, wintertime ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Freecol-developers mailing list Freecol-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freecol-developers
