What would this mean for maintenance and updates for the 3.12 branch?
Thanks
Jo
···
Jo Cook
t:+44 7930 524 155/twitter:@archaeogeek
Please note that currently I do not work on Friday afternoons. For urgent responses at that time, please visit support.astuntechnology.com or phone our office on 01372 744009
We create a 4.0.x in case someone needs to maintain a 4.0.x series.
And new work is done in main - 4.2.x. As discussed in related issues with Juan, I proposed a 4.2.0 mainly because H2 users will have to migrate manually their databases so it can be considered as a major change even if we do not recommend using H2 as the main database. So we will have a specific release note on that particular point.
Maybe we should better highlight who is maintaining what - a simple table with branches / names / time range could be a starting point. Something to add to the Bolsena agenda …
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
–
Jo Cook
t:+44 7930 524 155/twitter:@archaeogeek
Please note that currently I do not work on Friday afternoons. For urgent responses at that time, please visit support.astuntechnology.com or phone our office on 01372 744009
–
Sign up to our mailing list for updates on news, products, conferences, events and training
Jo Cook
t:+44 7930 524 155/twitter:@archaeogeek
Please note that currently I do not work on Friday afternoons. For urgent responses at that time, please visit support.astuntechnology.com or phone our office on 01372 744009
Thanks for the last contributions
I don’t think we have a clear versioning system do we ? I mean the semantic versioning.
I am not very sure why we should go for a 4.2 rather than a 4.0.8 but why not.
+1
Cheers
···
camptocamp
INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS
BY OPEN SOURCE EXPERTS
About versioning, indeed we don’t have clear rules on how to do it but we had that discussion in Bolsena in the past and in practice it was not that easy to follow. I remember some of the criteria raised in the discussion (not sure we made a wiki page somewhere about it ?):
Thanks for the last contributions
I don’t think we have a clear versioning system do we ? I mean the semantic versioning.
I am not very sure why we should go for a 4.2 rather than a 4.0.8 but why not.
+1
About versioning, indeed we don’t have clear rules on how to do it but we had that discussion in Bolsena in the past and in practice it was not that easy to follow. I remember some of the criteria raised in the discussion (not sure we made a wiki page somewhere about it ?):
Thanks for the last contributions
I don’t think we have a clear versioning system do we ? I mean the semantic versioning.
I am not very sure why we should go for a 4.2 rather than a 4.0.8 but why not.
+1