Re: RE: XML_Tree2 vs XML_Tree 2.0.0

On Sun, May 30, 2004 at 10:04:31AM +0100, Davey wrote: > I just wanted to comment on this before I go away till tuesday. > > I have read the thread and will probably do the following: > > Release an XML_Tree2 2.0.0RC3 - there are still some bugs I need to > catch, and rules state you need at least one RC before stable ;) > > Release an XML_Tree2 2.0.0 - Stable release. > > I am not sure what to do with XML_Tree yet, I'll re-read the thread for > ideas on tuesday. IMO such a versioning policy is not a good thing. What will happen in next few years? We will have package Foo, Foo2, Foo3 through FooX just because it was actively developed. PEAR repository will turn into garbage, where we will have X-1 Foo packages which are unmaintained (what for?) and only one FooX that will be developed. I didn't see such a versioning anywhere in the web, where breaking BC (and thus changing major) forces owner of the package to fork it. Do you really plan to maintain XML_Tree after XML_Tree2 is relased? Even if so, for how long? How many releases will there be? One, maybe two that contain only bugfixes? And then what? XML_Tree will cover with dust. Just my .02 -- http://www.mysza.eu.org/ | Everybody needs someone sure, someone true, PLD Linux developer | Everybody needs some solid rock, I know I do.