Re: [RFC] BC breakage in PEAR - how to handle it properly

On Thursday, September 18, 2003 2:26, Greg Beaver wrote: > This is why I think complete rewrites with no BC break should not be > major version increases - but Lukas and Pierre feel differently. I > would propose that complete rewrites should be a minor version increase > of at least 10, so that 1.2 becomes 1.12. In this way, we can have Foo > 1.x and Foo2 2.x > I really think major version increase probably should ONLY be for BC > breakage, otherwise it's just a huge mess that cannot be automated. > Acceptable? There is no need to requiere that. Foo can be 0.9, 1.0, 1.3, 2.4 (what we are doing nowadays), this new stuff will introduce a new "package" version, Foo2 that can be Foo2-0.9, Foo2-1.0, Foo2-2.3. If you'd never need major rewrite, there is no need to follow the proposed convention. -- Tomas V.V.Cox mailto:cox@idecnet.com