On Thursday, February 7, 2013 5:54:11 AM UTC-8, Norman Clarke wrote: > Please remember that Haml 3.2 includes breaking changes, and that updating > from 3.1.7 in some cases will require minor changes to your application. If > you plan to upgrade, please try the 3.2.0 release candidate in your > application as soon as possible. >
The first Haml 3.2.0 alpha was released on April 25, 2011. It has been in development for almost two years. Haml 3.0 was released on May 10, 2010, almost three years ago. I don't think it would be premature to call this release 4.0.0 instead of 3.2.0. This would comply with Semantic Versioning <http://semver.org/>, which requires that major version numbers increase whenever there are backward-incompatible changes after version 1.0.0 is released. By following Semantic Versioning, you can communicate meaning with your releases. Instead of having to say "Haml 3.2 includes breaking changes," it would simply be assumed that a new major version would contain some incompatibilities. Likewise, your users could depend on minor versions *not*breaking their code. When you don't follow Semantic Versioning, users need to be much more careful, checking each release before they upgrade to see whether it contains breaking changes or not. If you decided not to release this version as 4.0.0, I'd be curious to hear an explanation for why. I don't understand why some library maintainers are conservative about increasing major version numbers, as if there's a shortage of numbers and we may run out some day. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
