On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Gilles Sadowski <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > Hi. > >> >> I guess there are some other logical alternatives to consider: >> >> >> >> 1) s/2.2/3.0 s/3.0/4.0 >> >> 2) abandon 2.2 release > > From the fact that you have to consider these options, let's remember that, > at the release of 3.0, we should immediately create a "bug-fix-only" branch > (destined to remain backward compatible). > If what you mean by this is that immediately after 3.0 we start introducing incompatible changes (against the released 3.0 API), then no. We need to stabilize our API. We should try *very hard* to get the compatiblity-breaking changes that we want to introduce into 3.0 and then proceed with 3.1, 3.2, etc. that are compatible with the 3.0 release. It is not manageable or fair to users to bump major release numbers with each release, nor is it consistent with how we manage components in Commons.
Phil >> [...] > > Gilles > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
