In fact, you don’t even need to change the minor version (assuming this is the only thing being done). You can just do a “point release”, changing only the third digit, or 3.9.1
On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 9:43 PM Bruno P. Kinoshita <ki...@apache.org> wrote: > I think it makes sense, good to go with 3.x then. Thanks sebb! > > On Sunday, 25 August 2019, 1:35:41 pm NZST, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 00:57, Bruno P. Kinoshita > <brunodepau...@yahoo.com.br.invalid> wrote: > > > > Sorry, wrong PR [1] link: > https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/pull/445/ > > On Sunday, 25 August 2019, 11:51:47 am NZST, Bruno P. Kinoshita < > ki...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > In LANG-1478, a contributor provided a PR for > ClassUtils.getAbbreviatedName. > > If you have a class name with 10 characters (e.g. "ab.de.Ghij"), and > calls the method getAbbreviatedName passing the length argument of 10, you > get a 9 characters long string back "a.de.Ghij". > > The Javadoc for the length parameter states: > > > > "len the desired length of the abbreviated name" > > > > In my opinion it confirms the bug. I have tested the code from the > GitHub PR p1[ and it solves the bug, but given that it will be a backward > incompatible change (not binary, but behavior), I wonder if it needs a > major release then? (i.e. 4.x instead of 3.10). > > I don't see why it would need a major release. > > Fixing any code bug by definition changes behaviour. > Given that the Javadoc is unambiguous it's clear what the behaviour > should be, so it's extremely unlikely that anyone is relying on the > broken behaviour. > > > CheersBruno > > [1] https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/pull/446 > >
