> > I don’t really see the advantage to this over 4.1.0-SNAPSHOT1 Only benefit is that it indicates the purpose of the snapshot (date-based) rather than leaving it unspecified / as an exercise to the reader.
If the theorized workflow is people testing latest snapshot, doesn't add any value. On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 11:18 AM Brandon Williams <dri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 9:10 AM Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > A negative reaction of this approach is that our released versions > > will jump minor versions. For example, next year's release could be > > 4.3.0 and users might ask what happened to 4.1 and 4.2. This should > > only be a cosmetic concern, and general feedback seems to be that > > users don't care so long as version numbers are going up, and that we > > use semantic versioning so that major version increments mean > > something (we would never jump a major version). > > I don't think this is a major concern (today we go from 3.0 to 3.11 > from ticktock, after all) since the important thing is that the > version is larger and lexicographically sorts after the earlier one. > If I'm updating a machine via apt/rpm/whatever I may note which > packages are upgrading, but as long as the versions are greater there > isn't much reason to dig further. Generally when I do that, versions > are being skipped already. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > >
