I have the environment abstraction layer in the pipeline for mediawiki_selenium and we should definitely work toward improving mediawiki_api toward the API Client Gold Standard <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Client_code/Gold_standard>, but I don't think a 1.0.0 release will preclude those improvements in any way. Like Nik suggested, we shouldn't hesitate to increment the major version where appropriate—as long as we're communicating the change with semantic versioning <http://semver.org/> for both gems.
However, we should probably tighten up the versions specified in each test repro's Gemfile (e.g. gem "mediawiki_selenium", "~> 1.0.0") to avoid unexpected major upgrades. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Nikolas Everett <[email protected]> wrote: > 1.0.0 is fine with me. They are just version numbers. We can release > 2.0.0 if we need to so I wouldn't worry too much about it. > > Nik > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Željko Filipin <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> When we started working on mediawiki_selenium[1] and mediawiki_api[2] >> Ruby gems, my plan was to release version 1.0.0 when the gems reach >> stability. From what I can see, the gems were pretty much stable for a >> while. >> >> Does anybody have any plans for major changes in the near future? If not, >> should we just release them as 1.0.0, marking them stable and suitable for >> use? >> >> Željko >> -- >> 1: https://rubygems.org/gems/mediawiki_selenium >> 2: https://rubygems.org/gems/mediawiki_api >> >> _______________________________________________ >> QA mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/qa >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > QA mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/qa > > -- Dan Duvall Automation Engineer Wikimedia Foundation <http://wikimediafoundation.org>
_______________________________________________ QA mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/qa
