According to the Semantic versioning folks, dropping support for a Java
version is a breaking change requiring a major version update.
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:40 PM Dominik Stadler
wrote:
> Hi PJ,
>
> I now thought a bit about 3.2 vs. 4.0 and came to the conclusion below,
> this is naturally onl
Hi PJ,
I now thought a bit about 3.2 vs. 4.0 and came to the conclusion below,
this is naturally only my personal opinion, not sure how we best decide,
maybe call a quick vote for the release-version?
Calling it 4.0 would probably discourage people from upgrading, Java 6 and
7 is really really ou
I'm going to close the vote as inconclusive. No +1s or -1s.
Regarding, the prospective version number for next release, I would still
favour 3.2.0 due to lack of API change - but it's not a strong opinion either
way.
On the other hand, dropped support for no longer supported Java versions is not
an API change...
Obter o BlueMail para Android
Em 11 de set de 2019 23:28, em 23:28, Mark Murphy
escreveu:
>Following semantic versioning, might that be considered a serious
>enough
>breaking change to warrant a
Following semantic versioning, might that be considered a serious enough
breaking change to warrant a 4.0.0?
Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:
1. MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes,
2. MINOR version when you add functionality in a backwards compatibl
It's been 6 months since we released XMLBeans 3.1.1.
The reason I suggest naming next version as 3.2.0 is because we have dropped
support for Java 6 & 7.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XMLBEANS-542?jql=project%20%3D%20XMLBEANS%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%22Version%203.1.1%22
A few people
