Re: [DISCUSS] How we version our releases

I feel like the "T-1" approach only really makes sense if there are additional time guarantees with features that have left experimental status. I agree it is good to shift our versions to the left (folks already treated the concatenation of major.minor as our major), but I agree with Benedict and

Re: [VOTE] Simplifying our release versioning process

+1We have already agreed some time ago that any incompatible API change requires a DISCUSS thread. I’m fairly sure it’s documented on the wiki.I agree with Scott: our norm should be NOT breaking things. There should be strong justification in terms of either development friction or an unsafe or poo

Re: [VOTE] Simplifying our release versioning process

> I'd like to maintain a *very* high bar for user API-breaking changes – much > higher than "our rules allow us to" I don't know if we've formalized this (or even need to; may be obvious?), but having a bar of "[DISCUSS] thread on dev ML with clear consensus" seems reasonable for user API-breaki

Re: CEP-15 Update

Awesome milestone, congrats and thanks to all involved! 👏👏👏 On Fri, 18 Apr 2025 at 05:19 Dmitry Konstantinov wrote: > Hooray! Huge thanks to all! Now, I have no more excuses — it's time to try > it :-D > > On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 at 23:42, Jordan West wrote: > >> Congrats all! My previous reservati

Re: CEP-15 Update

What an amazing effort. Congrats to everyone who got it here so far. Can't wait to see the impact on our project and given the level of excitement in the user community, it will be huge. Now I have to update my awesome-accord Docker build! Patrick On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 7:23 AM Jeremy Hanna wr

Re: [DISCUSS] How we version our releases

> Assuming there's no major flaws in my reasoning above We can release 4.0.x today, while 5.0.x exists… so lets play with that We release 7.0.0, hooray !!! But during this we find a bug in 6.0.x that we back port, which deprecates something, so 6.0.x releases at the same time as 7.0.0… so can 7

Re: [DISCUSS] How we version our releases

> One thing that would be great to be super clear about, if a patch release > deprecates a feature, does that act as if the next major deprecated it, or > the current major? Hm. So thinking this through, the deprecate-then-release model gives us 2 affordances: 1. A minimum time horizon where so

Re: CEP-15 Update

Congratulations on this significant milestone and all of the years of effort to get to this point. > On Apr 18, 2025, at 9:11 AM, Paulo Motta wrote: > > Awesome milestone, congrats and thanks to all involved! 👏👏👏 > > On Fri, 18 Apr 2025 at 05:19 Dmitry Konstantinov

Re: CEP-15 Update

I think you awesome guys added so much additional testing that probably now Jenkins can’t keep up 🤣 Seems like some CI jobs timed out while still running tests after Accord got merged 😀 Jokes aside, awesome work! Huge congratulations to all the people involved! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Thank you all!! On Fri, 18 A

Re: [DISCUSS] How we version our releases

I’d much rather we agree to try NOT to deprecate or break things full stop. But once we decide there’s good reason to, I don’t think arbitrary lifetimes for a feature are really all that helpful are they?On 18 Apr 2025, at 20:03, Josh McKenzie wrote:I personally feel that patch level fixes should

Re: [DISCUSS] How we version our releases

If 7.0.0 was released then we wouldn't be removing features from it, even if we go back in time to 6.0 and mark something as deprecated. As a community I assume we all agree that's unreasonable. If something is marked as deprecated in a major release, that status shouldn't be changing out from un

Re: [CFP] Community Over Code NA 2025

Just a reminder! The deadline to submit a proposal closes at 6:59 PM 21 Apr 2025 in Central Daylight Time (UTC-05:00) timezone. Jon On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 6:51 AM Paulo Motta wrote: > Hi, > > Please see message below with instructions on submitting talk proposals > for Community Over Code 202

Re: [DISCUSS] How we version our releases

> I personally feel that patch level fixes should count as “next major” to > avoid this problem. +1. Let me try and distill yours and Joey's thoughts: 1. Any release after a MAJOR.0.0 qualifies as MAJOR+1 in terms of deprecation 2. On deprecation, explain the path forward to users (move to diff

Re: CEP-15 Update

Hooray! Huge thanks to all! Now, I have no more excuses — it's time to try it :-D On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 at 23:42, Jordan West wrote: > Congrats all! My previous reservations (that have been addressed) aside, > this is an amazing milestone. Awesome, awesome work! > > Jordan > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025