RFC006: Semantic Versioning

[cmwaters]

This RFC is the first in a set of items relating to Tendermint's upgrading story. It tries to capture prior internal dicussions held on versioning in Tendermint.

Rendered

[cmwaters]

high level question: there are multiple versions in Tendermint, will all of these converge on a single version or all have their own rules?

This is a good question. This RFC, in a way, ties in how the different sub versions within Tendermint i.e. (ABCI, Block, & P2P) relate to the overall version. There's probably still value in keeping these sub versions as a means of mapping to the different user groups although I do like the idea of having one simple version to represent the state of Tendermint.

[creachadair]

If you update your branch, I think the lint errors should go away. 🙂

[creachadair]

If you update your branch, I think the lint errors should go away. 🙂

Well, they were all fixed. But since then more folks have checked in broken links 😞

We should either make that check required, or remove it.

[williambanfield]

If you update your branch, I think the lint errors should go away. slightly_smiling_face

Well, they were all fixed. But since then more folks have checked in broken links disappointed

We should either make that check required, or remove it.

I vote make required, it's a simple check and should prevent some reasonably embarrassing issues.

[creachadair]

Well, they were all fixed. But since then more folks have checked in broken links disappointed We should either make that check required, or remove it.

I vote make required, it's a simple check and should prevent some reasonably embarrassing issues.

I agree, but we'll need to find someone with admin rights on the repository to change the branch protection rules.

[cmwaters]

I also agree and have updated it accordingly