On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Octavian Covalschi
<
octavian....@gmail.com> wrote:
> I mean, what if there is a bug in r2012.09.05? You're going to fix it, but nothing in it's naming/versioning says that it's a bug fix... or a new feature that's breaking other stuff.
That's not true. The "v2" in the package URL is a guarantee that it
shouldn't break other stuff. If we have to break the API, v2 will
remain untouched and a v3 will show up, just like we had in the v1 >
v2 transition.
Otherwise, If you see consecutive releases on the same package URL,
you know that it's either a bug fix release, or new compatible
features. The summary at the top and the detailed description coverage
should give you plenty of information about whether you should upgrade
or not.
As a natural exception to those rules, we have the mgo/txn recently
released which is still tagged as experimental. This one may see
changes within the same package URL for the moment.
> Any plans to change it's versioning scheme? It doesn't seem to fit this kind of software imho.
As explained, that doesn't seem to be the case, and I think we're
doing pretty well for the moment.
gustavo @
http://niemeyer.net