-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 272
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
Release a 1.x #109
Comments
What exactly is the issue with Dart/pub and pre 1.0.0 versions? |
https://www.dartlang.org/tools/pub/dependencies#caret-syntax
Basically, if you're semver'ing this repo and provide a minor update (say Right now, consumers have to either say |
That's what I tried to explain in my previous comment. For versions above 1.0.0 non-breaking changes should become 1.1.0 and breaking changes 2.0.0. |
We would only release a 0.15.x version when we do breaking changes. This repo has been in 0.14.x for quite a while now, a future update might for example focus on some renaming: flatMap to switchMap, amb to race etc... Such an update would be 0.15.x, targetting ^0.14.0 is therefore safe :) |
So the question remains, why not go 1.0 so minor is minor and not a major? |
Releasing 1.0.0 is usually a committment to try hard to avoid breaking changes. If there are already plans to make breaking changes there is no point in going 1.0.0. |
I actually think a 1.0.0 is a good call... However, I don't think we're quite ready yet! Gameplan:
Whatcha think? |
To bikeshed on the name. I'd remove For operator names, I got the impression the names follow TypeScript Rx4, while many names changed in Rx5. TypeScript Rx is the only other Rx I know a bit about, therefore it's likely I miss a few things. |
@brianegan I agree with the planning there. If it is a rename, that could be the 1.0. It would definitely break a lot to rename classes anyway. |
in a similar vein, it would be extremely useful if we could go back and add git tags at each release that is already on pub |
So we still haven't gone 1.0.0 :) The naming issue is now a bigger problem one year later, since rxdart had gained in popularity thanks to Flutter/BLoC. I'd say keep the rxdart name, it's actually consistent from the Rx perspective, they list all implementations as rx-language, i.e.
Regarding v1.0.0, I'd like to do a full code review first, maybe refactor a few tiny bits, but I think api-wise rxdart is complete enough for a first version. |
@frankpepermans I think you're right. I say let's give the current version of our |
Sounds good! |
Hey all -- we're working on converting the current library over to Extension methods. Once that's in place and stabilized, we should be good to go on a version 1.0. I'm going to close this out for now since I think the discussion has run it's course! |
Can this issue be reopened? RxDart is widely used in production, and the last breaking change was published 18 months ago. It does not seem like RxDart is still in an early phase where a 0.x version is typically used. |
Dart doesn't handle
0.x.x
the same as1.x.x
. It makes updating consumers a chore when a lot of them target^0.14.0
and this releases0.15.x
for a minor update.Any chance we can get a 1.x to make consumption easier?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: