Sorry, I may be being dense, but it's not that I didn't parse your
justification for it, but that I literally don't understand what the proposal
is.
On 03/05/2021, 08:30, "Mick Semb Wever" <m...@apache.org> wrote:
> I didn't really understand the unreleased versions proposal though.
Benedict, two brief example perspectives on it. This is all under the
"let's try, learn, evaluate" umbrella.
1)
Unreleased versions can give downstream more choices through the
annual development cycle than the binary choice of "latest snapshot"
or "a specific timestamped snapshot". An example, Reaper's tests
against trunk may find it too much overhead to keep up dev changes as
they land, but will benefit keeping up with quarterly increments.
2)
Being better at smooth version increments. Letting the version be
accurate to semver, and independent from the release cycle. This
should in turn get us better at knowing (and even automating) what
upgrades paths and compatibilities need to be tested through the dev
cycle. Our handling of versions through the tests is not ideal atm,
take for example the dtest upgrade manifest, or the jvm dtests which
can hardcode the upgrade paths within tests…)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
