[Catalyst-dev] When will Catalyst reach 6.0?

Darren Duncan darren at darrenduncan.net
Fri Dec 13 03:41:14 GMT 2013

On 2013.12.12 7:32 AM, André Walker wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 09:13:40AM -0600, Peter Karman wrote:
>> On 12/12/13 3:18 AM, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
>> >How about doing a Linus and putting an end to version number madness
>> >by simply declaring the next version to be a new major release? If we
>> >didn’t have sanity so far, at least we can have it from here on out.
>> >
>> >It’s never too late to fix an ongoing problem.
>> +1
> I agree with changing version numbers, but I don't think we should only do
> that, as the Linux kernel did. I think, in Catalyst's case, a new major
> version number is a great opportunity to break back-compat with things that
> cause problems (make the code base hard to understand, and almost nobody uses
> them anyway). Things like M::, V:: and C:: namespaces, etc.

I recommend separating those things.

Release a 6.0 now that is backwards compatible with the last current version, 
and is mostly just a renumbering.

Then later release either a 6.1 or a 7.0 or whatever as appropriate when you 
have major or backwards-breaking changes.

See, if you put out a release that is a major change or breaks something, you 
probably are going to have maintenance releases for the older version for awhile 
as well, so if you switch to 6.0 first, then those maintenance releases can have 
sane versions as well.

Also, then sane numbers are not held back until you have enough consensus to put 
out backwards-breaking or otherwise major changes.

-- Darren Duncan

More information about the Catalyst-dev mailing list