Yep.Added a very short "context" chapter linking to the detailed docs and explaining "MAJOR", "MINOR". "PATCH" numbers.
On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 6:42 PM Pierre Jeambrun <pierrejb...@gmail.com> wrote: > There is already a whole section about Semver in the README, maybe we can > just link to it ? > > Le dim. 29 oct. 2023 à 18:36, Pierre Jeambrun <pierrejb...@gmail.com> a > écrit : > > > I think this is a good idea. Speaking for myself, it wasn't clear to me > > until I got involved in the release process. > > > > In that PR, I think mentioning semver and pointing to the spec could be > > helpful. > > > > Le sam. 28 oct. 2023 à 22:14, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> a écrit : > > > >> Hey everyone, > >> > >> We had some discussions in the past about codifying the approach we have > >> for the Github Issues and PRs of ours / Milestones - so that users can > >> know > >> what to expect. > >> > >> We have - I believe - pretty good understanding of it amongst those who > >> are > >> involved in the release management but I guess a number of people (even > >> committers) are not sure how it works. Last week there were a few > >> questions > >> from a few committers "How do I make sure PR gets into 2.7.3" and a > number > >> of users/contributors have a different understanding of what it means > for > >> an issue or PR to be marked as "2.7.3" milestone. > >> > >> Example discussion that triggered my attempt to describe it was > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/32928#issuecomment-1783709930 > >> > >> I created a proposal describing what I think is the current "status > quo" - > >> how we treat milestones. Looking for Reviews/comments proposals (and > >> generally comment if we think it's a good idea to describe it. I think > >> there is no harm, and even if some users will not read it, we will > always > >> be able to just point them to the chapter if they have doubt, or bad > >> assumptions. > >> > >> PR here: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35245 (and likely - as > >> usual it can be shortened, written in better English etc.) - just > started > >> to get discussion about it. > >> > >> J. > >> > > >
