There are no 2.1 releases are there? Maybe 3.0 should be reserved for some incompatible refactor.
I know we had a discussion about this before; shouldn’t the major versions numbers have a goal of maintaining compatibility with the entire major number? So moving to 3 from 2 allows us to break backwards compatibility? Other than that, sounds like a plan. On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 5:08 PM Emmanuel Lécharny <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Le 06/07/2018 à 16:29, Jonathan Valliere a écrit : > > Any objections to setting up a 2.X branch which serves as the master then > > create the explicit numerical branches when releases are done? The 2.0 > > used to be the master but now there is 2.1. Just looking to make it > easier > > to understand. > > No objection. > > We should rename the 3.0 branch to MINA-future, and the 2.1 branch to 3.X. > > The current 2.0 branch could be renamed 2.X. > > -- > Emmanuel Lecharny > > Symas.com > directory.apache.org > >
