OK - 3.3.0 is fine by me. maybe better to do a big upgrade of neo4j on a big release of ours.
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Robert Dale <[email protected]> wrote: > One reason to not upgrade the version in existing release trains is to not > force anyone to upgrade their neo4j database. It's an irreversible database > format change from neo4j 2.x to 3.0. There may be other breaking changes > specific to neo4j itself [1]. > > OTOH, there are no TinkerPop API changes so it's "easy" enough for users to > manually downgrade (or upgrade) neo4j version. So if we do upgrade a patch > release, like 3.2.4, then they can remain on neo4j 2.3.x. > > The patch will actually work down to TP 3.1. I haven't tested earlier. > > 1. https://neo4j.com/guides/upgrade/#neo4j-3-0 > > > Robert Dale > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Is this actually a breaking change for users that would need to go to > > 3.0.0? Any reason it can't go to 3.2.4? > > > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Robert Dale <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Since TinkerPop 3.3.0 is introducing major changes, I figure now is a > > good > > > time to propose this update. > > > > > > Neo4j 3.0 was released on 4/26/2016. It's now at 3.0.7. The > > > neo4j-tinkerpop-api-impl > > > is also at 3.0.7 however the latest in the maven repo is 3.0.3. Thus we > > > would use the 3.0.3 version for now. I can sync-up with @jexp > > (maintainer) > > > to find out when 3.0.7 might be available in maven. > > > > > > The changes are minimal in that there are just a few cypher queries in > > the > > > unit tests that need parens - now required - around certain parameters. > > > > > > Sorry, there's not a significant time savings in the integration tests > > ;-) > > > > > > Robert Dale > > > > > >
