I'm +1 on the Google doc proposal and like Markus, I support relabeling 1.9 to 2.0 to line the versions up with the new paradigm without the X.1 LTS oddball.
Regards, Michael Manfre On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Collin Anderson <cmawebs...@gmail.com> wrote: > I also like the gdoc as it is. (1.8 LTS, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1 LTS, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2 > LTS, 4.0, etc.) LTS is the final of a major version number, and we > sacrifice a little bit of strict semver, but it give some nice meaning to > the version numbers. > > > On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 at 12:22:44 PM UTC-4, Carl Meyer wrote: >> >> Thanks Loïc, >> >> On 06/16/2015 01:15 AM, Loïc Bistuer wrote: >> > I've attempted to summarize the history of this thread. Note that I >> > marked as +1 any generally positive feedback towards a given >> > proposal, please correct if you feel misrepresented. >> > >> [snip] >> > >> > # Third iteration: >> > >> > 5/ Switching to Semantic Versioning >> > >> > Donald mentioned SemVer on IRC a few days ago. Since then various >> > proposal were made to reconcile it with our release policy. So far >> > Collin, Carl, Loïc, Tim, and Josh have expressed positive feedback to >> > various proposals in that direction but I don't think we have yet >> > reached consensus on a specific one. Tim updated the Google doc to >> > reflect my latest proposal, so including me that's 2 formal +1 for >> > it, but I'd say we should wait for at least a couple more votes >> > before taking it to the technical board. >> > >> > Refs: - http://semver.org/ - Carl's analysis >> > >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/MTvOPDNQXLI/Ojov2QBROg8J >> > >> > >> - Ryan's proposals >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/MTvOPDNQXLI/lBLWrhKJ6DIJ >> > - Loïc's proposal >> > >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/MTvOPDNQXLI/y2QbPVzSs6cJ >> >> FWIW, I am also +1 on your proposal, as currently documented in the >> Google doc. >> >> I was trying to come up with a proposal where LTS == major release for >> the sake of argument, since it seemed like that was intuitive to at >> least some people, but it's not worth the required lengthening of >> deprecation paths. Your proposal is much better. (And it does make some >> intuitive sense for the _last_ minor release in a major series to be LTS >> rather than the first). >> >> Carl >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/ebc7b0ae-27aa-4848-a6b5-9cec4b374895%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/ebc7b0ae-27aa-4848-a6b5-9cec4b374895%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- GPG Fingerprint: 74DE D158 BAD0 EDF8 keybase.io/manfre -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAGdCwBvLzcDHTfFQebw0gbJ%3DodJMxcVcYoiUXQ2HOpqicym3SA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
