search

haskell / pvp

Haskell Package Version Policy (PVP)
http://pvp.haskell.org/
38 stars 25 forks source link

Change diagram to suggest more common numbering progression #20

Closed xkollar closed 6 years ago

xkollar commented 6 years ago

Possibly related to issue #14.

Previously diagram seemed to suggest that changes should be

0.1.1 -> 0.2.1 or -> 1.1.1

instead of -> 0.2.0 or -> 1.0.0

which is not how package versioning on Hackage seems to work…

Rest of the text does not seem to specify what should happen with numbers "under bump".

hvr commented 6 years ago

I think this would be more accurate if the wording was also changed to say that "your release version should be at least"; as there's no formal requirement to release in a particular order nor to reset components to 0. In fact, there is no reference to the time dimension. The PVP merely states relationships between versions, without making any temporal reference.

xkollar commented 6 years ago

Image states "should", which I understand as "no a hard requirement, just guideline"… of course, people might have reasons to do something else.

Anyway, I have created additional commit, you can compare what you like more :-).

hvr commented 6 years ago

Thanks!

It's just confusing if the diagram implies more "shoulds" than the PVP text implies and implying that you "should" reset to .0 is not mentioned anywhere in the textual PVP. That's all :-)

xkollar commented 6 years ago

Np, I just though that what diagram suggested originally was not ideal even as a suggestion and that reset is better… Thanks for the merge :-). When it will get deployed O:-)?