On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 7:15 PM Gary Gregory wrote:
> We do not have a 1.0, so it is OK to break BC IMO.
+1
We do not have a 1.0, so it is OK to break BC IMO.
Gary
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 3:31 PM Bruno P. Kinoshita wrote:
> Hi all,
> We have added one binary backward incompatible change since
> commons-imaging-1.0-alpha1. Which means commons-imaging-alpha2 will be both
> behavior and binary incompati
Hi all,
We have added one binary backward incompatible change since
commons-imaging-1.0-alpha1. Which means commons-imaging-alpha2 will be both
behavior and binary incompatible.
There was some discussion around alpha/beta releases rencetly-ish [1]
I am writing to confirm that we can add more BC i
+1
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:24 PM Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Thanks for the suggestion, Rob.
>
> Should we contact him? [Perhaps he reads this ML...]
>https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-abeles-59b2603
>https://github.com/lessthanoptimal/
>
> In addition to EJML, it seems that ther
