Major version number change to 4.0?

[Matthew Adams <ma...@matthewadams.me>]

Hi all,

I know we recently released 3.0, will release 3.0.1 soon, and are
planning 3.1.  The thing is, we are planning on removing interface
JDOEntityManagerFactory, which I believe to be a breaking change.
IMHO, that should warrant a rev of the major version number, so that
JDO 3.1 really should be 4.0.

I always felt that, with a version convention of major.minor.micro, a
micro rev means bug fixes only, a minor rev means new features + bug
fixes, and a major rev means significant new features + bug fixes +
possible breaking changes or compatibility issues.

Thoughts?

-matthew

-- 
@matthewadams12
mailto:matthew@matthewadams.me
skype:matthewadams12
yahoo:matthewadams
aol:matthewadams12
google-talk:matthewadams12@gmail.com
msn:matthew@matthewadams.me
http://matthewadams.me
http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams

Re: Major version number change to 4.0?

[Andy Jefferson <an...@datanucleus.org>]

> I know we recently released 3.0, will release 3.0.1 soon, and are
> planning 3.1.  The thing is, we are planning on removing interface
> JDOEntityManagerFactory, which I believe to be a breaking change.
> IMHO, that should warrant a rev of the major version number, so that
> JDO 3.1 really should be 4.0.
> Thoughts?

Who uses JDOEntityManagerFactory ? DataNucleus never has, and consequently its 
users haven't. Any other implementations claiming compliance and using it?; I 
don't see any. Besides which, if going to JDO 4.0 then should also include
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-687
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-652
since they certainly will change methods/classes that users *do* use. Due to 
resource constraints I don't see those being squeezed into the next release.

Consequently my vote is keep as JDO3.1


-- 
Andy
DataNucleus (http://www.datanucleus.org)