+1. I agree and will keep this in mind as well. On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 5:26 AM, Seetharam Venkatesh <[email protected]> wrote: > +1. Makes total sense. > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Oozie i already doing a good job at keeping backwards compatibility for >> user apps between releases, even if we add new functionality/features in >> micro/minor releases. >> >> Micro/minor releases also carry critical fixes that are desirable >> regardless of the new functionality/features. And we recommend users to >> upgrade to the greatest latest to get their benefit. >> >> Making DB schema changes as part of a micro/minor update makes the upgrade >> more complex (requiring a DB backup) and more difficult to undo in case of >> an unexpected issue with the upgrade. >> >> Because of that I'd like to propose that DB schema changes should only be >> done done as part of major upgrades (ie from 3.x to 4.x). >> >> Thx. >> >> -- >> Alejandro >> > > > > -- > Regards, > Venkatesh > > Phone: (408) 658-8368 > EMail: [email protected] > > http://in.linkedin.com/in/seetharamvenkatesh > http://about.me/SeetharamVenkatesh > > “Perfection (in design) is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, > but rather when there is nothing more to take away.” > - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
-- Harsh J
