[geomoose-psc] 2.9.1 vs 2.10.0

[TC Haddad]

Maybe you can better describe the 'grid extension by default' option, as
that seems to be the pivotal issue?

- if 'default' means that it is included for easy access and use, that's
fairly trivial
- if 'default' means that it is now going to displace an existing alternate
method, that's significant.

TH

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:26 AM, James Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > From semver.org
> >
> > Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:
> >
> > MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes,
> > MINOR version when you add functionality in a backwards-compatible
> manner,
> > and
> > PATCH version when you make backwards-compatible bug fixes.
> >
> > Additional labels for pre-release and build metadata are available as
> > extensions to the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format.
> >
> > =
> >
> > I would vote for this being viewed from the users of our API's
> perspective,
> > not the project's perspective.  The point of semantic versions is to
>
> Exactly.  Build system and other development items have no impact on
> the released software or versioning (from the users' perspective).
>
> > communicate the level and type of change they can expect.  In our case
> our
> > API is defined as the mapbook format, the javascript GeoMOOSE namespace,
> and
> > the services interface.  Notable things that aren't listed that maybe
> should
> > be might be general user experience (that would require retraining) and
> > something covering the PHP services in the demo parcel application and
> maybe
> > the layout of the demo.
>
> Good point about the demo and default services.
>
> >
> > To me the grid extension is (1) an extension, not core and (2) a bit of a
> > technology preview as there are many known deficiencies yet particularly
> > when dealing with more than one layer, so updates to that wouldn't force
> a
> > 2.10 in my mind.
> >
> > Changing the functional defaults (including the grid extension by
> default)
> > may be going too far for a 2.9.1.
>
> Right, this could go either way but is starting to push the limit.
>
> >
> > The rest seem to clearly fall into a 2.9.1.
>
> Agree.
>
> Eli
>
> >
> > Technically breaking changes should force a 3.0.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Dan Little <theduckylittle at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey folks,
> >>
> >> Jim and I are working on some improvements to the 2.9 version of
> >> GeoMoose.  I'm hoping to have something in the next month or so.  It
> >> will feature:
> >>
> >> * Various bug fixes as we find them.
> >> * A slightly improved version of the Grid extension.
> >> * Grid extension by default (maybe?)
> >> * Some small improvements to the build system to make debugging easier.
> >>
> >> Given the rules of semantic versioning I'm not sure where this falls.
> >> The latter is definitely a change but it shouldn't be a breaking
> >> change and would be very close to a "bug fix" IMO.  The bug being
> >> "there are slow loading times for development".
> >>
> >> Opinions?
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> geomoose-psc mailing list
> >> geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > geomoose-psc mailing list
> > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
> _______________________________________________
> geomoose-psc mailing list
> geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-psc/attachments/20160610/9902be88/attachment.html>