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

Use "major version" and "minor version" for syntactic versions #54

Open
sdboyer opened this issue Jun 21, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

Use "major version" and "minor version" for syntactic versions #54

sdboyer opened this issue Jun 21, 2022 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation good first issue Good for newcomers help wanted Extra attention is needed
Milestone

Comments

@sdboyer
Copy link
Contributor

sdboyer commented Jun 21, 2022

Thema's versioning system has two digits, e.g. v0.0 - what people coming from semver would be naturally inclined to call a "major version" and a "minor version."

i resisted this naming initially, for reasons i can't even remember. Instead, i've been calling the first number "sequence version" and the second "schema version." But this was an error. For one, "schema version" is confusingly ambiguous - is that the second number, or the version number as a whole? And second, the cost of asking people to learn new terms for version number positions is significantly higher than the risk of having folks transfer possibly-slightly-incorrect associations from semver.

Putting me over the top on this was the fact that OpenMetadata landed on major.minor with exactly the same semantics.

So - all docs need to be updated to use major and minor where appropriate. Variables and fields should be renamed from e.g. seqv and schv to majv and minv.

@sdboyer sdboyer added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation good first issue Good for newcomers help wanted Extra attention is needed labels Jun 21, 2022
@sdboyer sdboyer added this to the Stable milestone Jun 21, 2022
@ishanjainn ishanjainn self-assigned this Nov 4, 2022
@frossano-grafana
Copy link

@rhorvath can we look at this PR and see if it's good to be merged, and close the issue?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation good first issue Good for newcomers help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants