I agree about item #4. I also think that our API is sufficiently mature
that we should shoot for 1.0.0 release and go from there. Plus it would be
a nice first-release-after-graduation step. But that's probably a
discussion to have after we talk about our versioning scheme first =D


-- Joyce


On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Cameron Goodale <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hey Mike,
>
> I like the idea of semantic versioning and that we can point at a mature
> versioning scheme without having to invent our own.
>
> From the link you provided, pre 1.0.0 versions are not considered stable or
> production ready, meaning the Public API of OCW should not be considered
> stable.
>
> Item #4 from semver.org:
>
> > "Major version zero (0.y.z) is for initial development. Anything may
> > change at any time. The public API should not be considered stable."
>
>
> I think that this is a wonderful practice to adopt for the project.
>
> If this needs to be voted on, please count this as my +1.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Cameron
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Michael Joyce <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Now that we're out of incubator I would like to propose a change to our
> > current versioning scheme. So far our versioning has been fairly
> arbitrary.
> > Our current version is 0.4-incubating simply because our previous version
> > was 0.3-incubating. I would like to see us move to more standard
> versioning
> > scheme just as [1].
> >
> > TLDR:
> >
> > Versions are Major.Minor.Patch
> > Major: Backwards incompatible API changes increment this
> > Minor: Backwards compatible changes increment this
> > Patch: Backwards compatible bug/hot fixes increment this
> >
> > This makes it much easier to logic about whether upgrading is viable and
> > what exactly is going to break in an existing code base if you update OCW
> > to the latest version.
> >
> > Note, I know I mention that our current version in 0.4-incubating. I'm
> > going to be updating that in a second so that it is just 0.4 since we're
> no
> > longer incubating!
> >
> > [1] http://semver.org/
> >
> > -- Joyce
> >
>

Reply via email to