[Cubicweb] CubicWeb numbering scheme and release process

Julien Cristau julien.cristau at logilab.fr
Thu Jul 23 09:10:56 CEST 2015

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 18:06:58 +0200, Sylvain Thénault wrote:

> Hi,
> I'm very fine with all those changes but would like to discuss (quickly) the two
> points below:
> > - change the numbering to a "year.month" scheme; with 4 releases a year, the next 
> >   versions will be something like "15.10", "16.01", "16.04", "16.07" (or similar),
> > 
> > - commit to keep the backward-compatibility code for at least a year (meaning 4 versions:
> >   a deprecation introduced in 15.10 will not be removed before 17.01) and clearly
> >   document the important changes and the migration path in the release notes,
> The proposed numbering scheme makes it hard to know which release is a major
> release or not. Also, we should probably not commit to something else than
> maintaining a release for at least one year.
TBH I don't think the "major release" concept, and strict semantic
versioning, can apply to something with such a wide API surface as
cubicweb.  Every single change is liable to break some use somewhere.

Julien Cristau          <julien.cristau at logilab.fr>
Logilab		        http://www.logilab.fr/
Informatique scientifique & gestion de connaissances

More information about the Cubicweb mailing list