Skip to content
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

Mark as 0.18-DEV and remove deprecations #643

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 4, 2020
Merged

Mark as 0.18-DEV and remove deprecations #643

merged 3 commits into from
Aug 4, 2020

Conversation

oxinabox
Copy link
Member

closes #577

closes #496

Follows up on #603 (comment)
and deprecates find_root

Required to be merged before #547

@oxinabox oxinabox changed the title Mark as 0.18-DEV Mark as 0.18-DEV and remove deprecations Jul 11, 2020
@davidanthoff
Copy link
Contributor

PLEASE, make it 1.0.0! So that going forward you have the option to do minor, patch and major releases.

@oxinabox
Copy link
Member Author

@davidanthoff see #479

Can't do it this release as it still has deprecations added.
Further there are pending breaking issues still open,
and we haven't completed the audit of the code base to be sure we don't have any Julia 0.3 style constructors, or other issues from not following the Julia 1.0 APIs. (like push! returning the value rather than the collection etc).
I am keen to get to 1.0 also, but not if I know that i will be tagging 2.0 soon after.

@davidanthoff
Copy link
Contributor

I think there is zero harm in a 2.0 shortly after a 1.0, who cares? But going 1.0 now allows you to do minor and patch releases in the meantime, which is a great benefit to downstream packages because it becomes clear what is what. I think this fixation on 1.0 as a somewhat special version really is not a good match with the fact that semver plays an important role in the package resolution story in Julia.

@oxinabox
Copy link
Member Author

While I do agree, in general and personally, I just am not willing to commit to that position on DataStructures.jl.
Because it is such a public package, and that is not the standard the community follows. Not yet at least.
Make the case on any other package I maintained and I would be seriously considering it, but not DataStructures.

(When we started talking about general registry, I argued that it should not accept packages before they tagged 1.0)

@oxinabox oxinabox requested a review from eulerkochy July 13, 2020 14:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Prepare for release 0.18 Deprecate then Remove ClassifierCollections
3 participants