Hi,
Reflecting to an ongoing chat conversation about intermediate releases:
I agree with not rushing 1.0, but having multiple releases with big API
changes after 0.8 would be probably difficult for the user base to adopt
to.
A problematic example:
- We make a decision on which namespace a particular component belongs
to and change it for a version 0.9
- We decide to change this again for fixing up the public API with a
deadline of 1.0
This would effectively mean that the end users would potentially need to
change their codebase to adopt to us getting ready for 1.0.
I propose us agreeing only on having a robust v1.0 and plan no
intermediate release unless we clearly see its necessity.
Cheers,
Adam
On 2020. 07. 15. 19:30, Joe Witt wrote:
"To allow the
community some time to finalize the API, I would not rush 1.0 right after
0.8, unless we see that the API is stable and something we can commit to."
+1 to that
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:28 AM Marton Szasz <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
+1. There are countless fixes and stability improvements on the main
development branch that would benefit the majority of users.
Breaking changes: there are some minor API breakages compared to 0.7, but
there was an effort to avoid breaking core APIs and the configuration
syntax.
I agree with Marc that we should allow ourselves more freedom to fix issues
even at the cost of breaking APIs, especially before 1.0. To allow the
community some time to finalize the API, I would not rush 1.0 right after
0.8, unless we see that the API is stable and something we can commit to.
Thanks, regards,
Marton
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 at 17:36, Marc Parisi <[email protected]> wrote:
+1 to 0.8.0. Been keeping up with changes and I think the progress is
great.
In my opinion the breaking changes are long coming and probably would be
appreciated by the community.
Arpad are you thinking of going to 1.x? You're discussing 0.8, but is
there
any reason to not jump to 1.x after that?
Thanks,
Marc
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:12 AM Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote:
Arpad
Yep makes sense. Frankly the 0. versioning gives the flexibility to do
these breaking changes during this stage of the lifecycle.
Thanks
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 7:06 AM Arpad Boda <[email protected]> wrote:
Hey,
Quite a lot of time has passed since the last release and also a lot
of
improvements and bug fixes have been made (Memleaks fixed, new
threadpool,
some new processors, etc), so I think it's time for a new release.
Another important aspect would be the release of the current state of
the
source before introducing some breaking changes - which seems to be
necessary at this point.
What do you think?
Thanks, regards,
Arpad
