Mark Miller: > If you have upgraded Lucene over the years and you never touched code to > tweak performance, you still got fantastic performance improvements. You just > didn't get them all. If you never touched the code over the years, your project is probably already dead.
Shai Erera: > Exactly ! which is why I think we should relax the back-compat policy "a > bit". Index compatibility across versions is verily important, that I can't argue with. Drop-in compatibility between bugfix releases, absolutely. Spare me throngs of deprecated stuff and should-be-dead code on major releases. And major release is any release that takes more than half a year, matter not which part of version number you increment. > And ... (I realize it's going to complicate things a bit) we could also > decide to have dot release for bug fixes, like we had 2.4.1. So let's say > when 3.4 comes (3-4 years from now :) ). In 3.6 we don't preserve any > back-compat. If there is a bug, we fix it on 3.6 and also on a 3.4.1 branch. > Those that just want to take the bug fixes can upgrade to 3.4.1. Those that > upgrade to 3.6 get the bug fixes and all the rest of the changes done, so > they should be ready to change their code. +1. That's how the rest of the world does it. -- Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (ear...@gmail.com) Home / Mobile: +7 (495) 683-567-4 / +7 (903) 5-888-423 ICQ: 104465785 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
