Re: API review for 1.11; do we need to mark new APIs as experimental?

I have written my proposal and rationale at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SVN/LTS+and+regular+releases Summary of my latest thoughts: * Apps using experimental APIs should be packaged declaring a single-version dependency. Then there is no need to provide error-return stub versions

Re: Subversion 1.11.0-rc1 up for testing/signing

For anyone not following dev@ closely: it looks like we'll abandon this RC and roll another, mainly due to changes in how we want to expose experimental APIs. Please follow the dev@ mail thread "API review for 1.11; do we need to mark new APIs as experimental?" for details. - Julian

Re: API review for 1.11; do we need to mark new APIs as experimental?

Julian Foad wrote on Wed, 19 Sep 2018 13:46 +0100: > I have written my proposal and rationale at > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SVN/LTS+and+regular+releases About LTS v. experimental: LTS promises shouldn't apply to experimental API's; an experimental API is always covered by the su

Re: API review for 1.11; do we need to mark new APIs as experimental?

There was some good discussion on IRC today about the rules for experimental APIs. http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/svn-dev?date=2018-09-19 I'll get ideas from this incorporated in the wiki page tomorrow. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SVN/LTS+and+regular+releases Anybody

Re: API review for 1.11; do we need to mark new APIs as experimental?

Julian Foad wrote on Wed, 19 Sep 2018 18:11 +0100: > There was some good discussion on IRC today about the rules for > experimental APIs. > http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/svn-dev?date=2018-09-19 > > I'll get ideas from this incorporated in the wiki page tomorrow. > https://cwiki.apach