Skip to content

Conversation

codyps
Copy link
Contributor

@codyps codyps commented Jan 15, 2016

Right now byteorder 0.4.2 appears to work fine without code changes.

And 0.3.x will (of course) continue to work.

We want to expand the allowed versions so users of this crate can avoid
pulling in (unneededly) multiple versions of the same create (byteorder
uses libc)

I've expanded the version match to allow any '0.*' version to avoid
repeating this commit in the future, but I'm OK if you'd like a more
restricted version (does cargo allow '<0.5 && >=0.3'?).

@3Hren
Copy link
Owner

3Hren commented Jan 16, 2016

Thanks for the contribution!

However it's a common practice in Semantic Versioning to break the backward compatibility in minor releases until 1.0, so the only way for me is to test each minor release manually. But unfortunately due to lack of information about byteorder's backward compatibility between 0.3 and 0.4 just bumping rmp dependency results in undefined state of its own backward compatibility, which in turns results in minor version bumping (and for all its clients transitively).

If you restrict the version to ^0.4 (meaning 0.4.*) I'll merge this PR in master branch, but wait some time until publishing.

Right now byteorder 0.4.2 works fine without code changes.

Switching to the newer versions allow users of this crate to avoid
pulling in (unneededly) multiple versions of the same crate (byteorder
uses libc, which is widely depended on)
@codyps
Copy link
Contributor Author

codyps commented Jan 18, 2016

I've modified this PR to restrict the version as requested.

3Hren added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2016
misc(rmp): allow use of newer byteorder dep
@3Hren 3Hren merged commit d7c233e into 3Hren:master Jan 18, 2016
@3Hren
Copy link
Owner

3Hren commented Jan 18, 2016

Great, thanks!

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.

2 participants