-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 146
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
Release 1.0 #467
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Release 1.0 #467
Conversation
I'd say we do #419 and #463, which I don't think are actually breaking changes, but can be considered breaking changes, and we can call that v1.0. Then, once it's v1.0, I'd say we can document the Dual number interface, #379 because I'd hope no one would ever change that. I'd like to get @KristofferC and @jrevels 's input though. But I think it's pretty safe to say, ForwardDiff works and if you want a very different AD then make a new package. |
I agree with those 2 PRs. |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #467 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 87.31% 87.31%
=======================================
Files 10 10
Lines 757 757
=======================================
Hits 661 661
Misses 96 96 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Please don't make a non-breaking 1.0.0 release. |
Its an unfortunate concisquence of julia's semver extension that 1.0.0 is always considered breaking. But in this case I am kind of happy to have it considered breaking because #463 is borderline breaking. |
Something holding this? |
If someone wants to do this they need to make a corresponding change to the registry that allows ForwardDiff 1.0 for those packages that are currently claiming compatibility with ForwardDiff 0.10. |
1.0 has already been tagged. |
I don't know how to read. |
Noone wants to change FowardDIff.
It is stable.
Even if one does want to change ForwardDiff, noone wants to change the API in a breaking way.