That sounds more like a political release number, I would hope we were not too political here (except about Apache values :) )
Changing the major version number should cause Maven/OSGi to moan if project A needs say bcel 5.1 and another tries to pull in 6.0 - that would be the purpose of the major version number change. If there is no binary incompatibility introduced, then it seems pointless to enforce such warnings with a new major version in pom.xml and friends. The nature of the project matters - say an application which is not dependended on as a library would be more natural to bump the major version when there are significant UI or feature changes. (This is a very relevant discussion as another thread was just talking about updating https://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html to relate to SemVer) On 19 February 2015 at 15:38, Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> wrote: > Le 19/02/2015 16:29, sebb a écrit : > >> However, according to SemVer one should bump major version if and only >> if breaking compat. >> It's only recently that Commons has started discussing whether to use >> strict SemVer or not; I don't think it has been agreed for all >> components. > > SemVer provides sane guidelines but I wouldn't follow it religiously. In > my opinion a major version bump is ok even if the compatibility is > preserved, it can denote major improvements like the ones staged for > BCEL 6.0. > > Emmanuel Bourg > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > -- Stian Soiland-Reyes Apache Taverna (incubating) http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
