On Oct 9, 2007 11:02 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > On Oct 9, 2007 10:48 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> [X] retain versioning as-is, e.g. 1.3.0 is our next potential 'GA release' > > > > If we have API-incompatible changes, then start the 2.x.x process - > > but us distributing 1.x.x with in-flux APIs is insane. -- justin > > One can argue bopping from 2.x.x to 3.x.x. to 4.x.x is much more asinine, as > it would give API users no possibility of settling on a supported version > with major releases every 6 to 12 months for API-breaking changes.
Then change the versioning rules for 2.x.x. But, changing the rules for 1.x.x after they've been codified for years *is* insane. (FWIW, I disagree that we have to cut releases to get developer feedback.) -- justin
