> If we fix this bug and immediately start a new hotfix version naming v4.3.1, we will have no v4.3.0 any more.
If the problem is really dangerous, maybe we should abandon this version. The main consideration is to keep the content unchanged, as Sheng Wu said. In fact, this has already caused a few confusions in the community now. When reporting issues, we ask them to provide the version number, but the version number in the source code doesn't contain release candidate number like 'rc1'. This may cause confusion when it's about a bug fixed in an rc version. Wenli On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 4:32 PM SHUANG SU <sushuang0...@gmail.com> wrote: > > In my opinion, an updated release candidate (e.g. rc-2, rc-3 ...) should > not contain new features or fix bugs. They should only fix release-related > problems like license problems. > > I agree with that. > > > Even if there is an urgent issue, we should start a new hotfix version > rather than adding it in another release candidate. > > I am afraid I don't agree with that. > For example, if we are in the procedure of release v4.3.0, the current > version that > is public testing is v4.3.0.rc-1, and a bug is found in this version. > If we fix this bug and immediately start a new hotfix version naming > v4.3.1, we will have no v4.3.0 any more. > If we publish v4.3.0 with the serious bug not fixed, and start a new hotfix > version naming v4.3.1, > the v4.3.0 probably harm users. > > > > ------------------------------ > Su Shuang (100pah) > ------------------------------ > > > > On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 16:17, Ovilia <oviliazh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I think it should be the changelog since the last formal release. > > > > In my opinion, an updated release candidate (e.g. rc-2, rc-3 ...) should > > not contain new features or fix bugs. They should only fix > release-related > > problems like license problems. > > Even if there is an urgent issue, we should start a new hotfix version > > rather than adding it in another release candidate. > > > > Perhaps we should also discuss our version number policy in this thread. > > A popular method may be MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH [1]. > > In this case, we may add the minor version in each regular monthly > release, > > and use patch number to version hotfix versions. > > > > Apache release policy [2] doesn't talk too much about whether release > > candidates could include new features or new bug fixes. Could our mentor > > give any advice on this? > > > > [1] https://semver.org/ > > [2] http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html > > > > Wenli > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 4:04 PM SHUANG SU <sushuang0...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > Su Shuang (100pah) > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > > > From: SHUANG SU <sushuang0...@gmail.com> > > > Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 15:56 > > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Changelog issue > > > To: <priv...@echarts.apache.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Shall we discuss a changelog issue: > > > > > > Suppose we have these versions: > > > 4.1.0(formal release) ==> 4.2.1-rc.1(pre-release) ==> 4.2.1(formal > > release) > > > > > > The changelog of 4.2.1, should be: > > > A. The diff with 4.1.0 > > > (where the major part of the changelog of 4.2.1 will be > duplicated > > > with the changelog of 4.2.1-rc.1) > > > B. The diff with 4.2.1-rc.1 > > > (where the changelog of 4.2.1 will contain only a little content, > > > that is probably not appropriate for a "formal release") > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > Su Shuang (100pah) > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > >
