[Biojava-dev] version 3.1.0 plans and deprecation

[Jose Manuel Duarte]

+1 to Andreas' comment


On 02/04/14 23:00, Andreas Prlic wrote:
> I do like semantic versioning and I believe it would make it easier for
> users to understand how significant changes are between releases.
>
> There is nothing preventing us from jumping to "4.0" instead of "3.1" . As
> such I'd say let's start to use semantic versioning starting with next
> release. This would make the next release the 4.0.0 release.
>
> That leaves the question what to do about your case, where you need to
> remove code due to the deprecation of code in an external library. Since we
> are making a major version change anyways, let's move forward fast and
> delete and replace the related code.
>
> Andreas
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Michael Heuer <heuermh at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello devs,
>>
>> Biojava has never followed the semantic versioning specification
>>
>> http://semver.org/
>>
>> in that MAJOR version is set in stone due to the abandoned biojava2
>> effort and binary incompatible changes have been allowed to take place
>> between MINOR version changes (and perhaps even between PATCH
>> versions, although I'm not sure I can find any examples).
>>
>> I need to make some changes to the org.biojava3.sequencing.io.fastq
>> package, e.g.
>>
>>
>> http://www.biojava.org/docs/api/org/biojava3/sequencing/io/fastq/FastqReader.html#parse(com.google.common.io.InputSupplier,%20org.biojava3.sequencing.io.fastq.ParseListener)
>>
>> because InputSupplier and related have been deprecated and scheduled
>> for removal from Guava.
>>
>> "This interface is scheduled for removal in June 2015."
>>
>> http://docs.guava-libraries.googlecode.com/git-history/v16.0.1/javadoc/com/google/common/io/InputSupplier.html
>>
>>
>> 3.0.8 --> 3.1.0 has been proposed because some deprecated biojava3
>> code is ready to be removed.  I am wondering how I should coordinate
>> the changes to io.fastq, deprecate in 3.0.9 and remove in 3.1.0, or
>> deprecate in 3.1.0 and remove in 3.2.0?  Similarly in biojava-legacy,
>> deprecate in 1.8.6 and remove in 1.9 or deprecate in 1.9 and remove in
>> 1.10?
>>
>> Or should biojava3 at least move to semantic versioning from this
>> point forward and jump to 4.0 instead of 3.1.0?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>     michael
>> _______________________________________________
>> biojava-dev mailing list
>> biojava-dev at lists.open-bio.org
>> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-dev
>>
>
>