You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This issue is based on the comments in issue COMCIFS/cif_core#312. The original message reads:
We need to improve the explanation of how to determine whether or not a change is major/minor/patch in the dictionary development guidelines, something like:
major: incompatible change in data name meaning
minor: addition of one or more new data names (except those already implied by existing names, i.e. _su)
version: improvement in existing data names, fixing of bugs
We are unlikely to ever change the major number as far as I can tell.
Similar rules are already provided in section Versioning a development dictionary, however, these may need expanding or rewriting.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Our current development process consists of incrementing the minor number and then accumulating many updates under that minor number. This seems reasonable and keeps our minor number at a reasonable size. Incrementing the patch number would then only happen where there was a bad bug and we needed an immediate release to fix it.
This issue is based on the comments in issue COMCIFS/cif_core#312. The original message reads:
Similar rules are already provided in section
Versioning a development dictionary
, however, these may need expanding or rewriting.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: