Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Using Semantic Versioning for the releases #305

Open
phax opened this issue Feb 16, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

Using Semantic Versioning for the releases #305

phax opened this issue Feb 16, 2022 · 4 comments
Assignees

Comments

@phax
Copy link
Collaborator

phax commented Feb 16, 2022

It would be highly appreciated, if Semantic Versioning according to https://semver.org/ is applied to the EN 16931 release artefacts.
If new rules are able to break existing XML instances, a new major version should be applied, so that users know, to intensify tests accordingly. This is especially relevant, when the EN 16931 is included into other bundles.

@oriol oriol added this to the 1.3.8 milestone Mar 20, 2022
@oriol oriol removed this from the 1.3.8 milestone Mar 29, 2022
@oriol
Copy link
Collaborator

oriol commented Mar 29, 2022

This will be considered for next release

@oriol oriol added this to the 1.3.9 milestone Sep 30, 2022
@oriol oriol removed this from the 1.3.9 milestone Oct 4, 2022
@phax
Copy link
Collaborator Author

phax commented Oct 4, 2022

  • Currently we give the impression that we use semantic versioning, but we don't use it
  • Alternatively, because we will more or less break backwards compatibility all the time, we can just label or releases with only a number (1, 2, 3, 4, ...). We can see this as the consequent usage of semantic versioning :)
  • Based on the number of tags we have, the released planned to be "1.3.9" would be "release 16"

@oriol
Copy link
Collaborator

oriol commented Oct 4, 2022

The proposal from @phax is to issue the releases not following the Semantic Versioning approach but just using an incremental release number. In this case, the next release would be 16 instead of 1.3.9.

@midran

@midran
Copy link
Collaborator

midran commented Oct 5, 2022

The plan is to bring this up in the DIGITAL advisory group before deciding on this. So for this release we should continue with the 3 position, semantic like but not really semantic versioning numbering system using 1.3.9

Personally I am also in favour of a 1, 2, 3 .... numbering sequence.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants