[DISCUSS] thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/jy6vodbkh64plhdfwqz3l3364gsmh2lq
The proposed new versioning mechanism: 1. We no longer use semver .MINOR 2. Online upgrades are supported for all GA supported releases at time of new .MAJOR 3. T-1 releases are guaranteed API compatible for non-deprecated features 4. We use a deprecate-then-remove strategy for API breaking changes (deprecate in release N, then remove in N+1) This would translate into the following for our upcoming releases (assuming 3 supported majors at all times): • 6.0: 5.0, 4.1, 4.0 online upgrades are supported (grandfather window). We drop support for 4.0. API compatibility is guaranteed w/5.0 • 7.0: 6.0, 5.0, 4.1 online upgrades are supported (grandfather window). We drop support for 4.1. API compatibility is guaranteed w/6.0 • 8.0: 7.0, 6.0, 5.0 online upgrades are supported (fully on new paradigm). We drop support for 5.0. API compatibility guaranteed w/7.0 David asked the question: > Does this imply that each release is allowed to make breaking changes > (assuming they followed the “correct” deprecation process)? My first instinct > is to not like this Each release *would* be allowed to make breaking changes but only for features that have already been deprecated for one major release cycle. This is a process change so as per our governance: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Cassandra+Project+Governance, it'll require a super majority of 50% of the roll called PMC in favor. Current roll call is 21 so we need 11 pmc members to participate, 8 of which are in favor of the change. I'll plan to leave the vote open until we hit enough participation to pass or fail it up to probably a couple weeks.
