K. That's essentially what this boils down to: semver hangover. People just _assume_ that's how any project now rolls.
On 7/10/12 3:20 PM, "Brian LeRoux" <[email protected]> wrote: >Oh agree completely, if we assign meaning (like majors meaning an API >change) then sure it effects it. I think is mostly a hangover from >semver thinking --- and increasingly thinking that semver not the >right fit for this proj. We have too many dependencies on outside libs >to formalize deprecation to a 1 year cycle. > >On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>One thing I'd like to add: cadence has nothing to do w/ deprecation >>>policy. Shipping on a regular heartbeat is a completely different >>>concern from the actual artifacts being shipped. >> >> Well, the two are interconnected. If we ship a point release every >>month, >> and state that we have a deprecation policy of 6 months, that means we >>can >> break an API 6 point releases or so after deciding an API is deprecated. >> So these don't necessarily line up with landing breaking changes in >>major >> releases. >>
