Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Versioning Notes

["Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@sun.com>]

It makes for a very long upgrade cycle, and these days I'd be more 
inclined to just say that it must be announced only at least one *minor* 
revision prior to the major revision's release.  The world just moves 
faster now, and the advent of XML and -- especially -- XSLT has 
increased people's tolerance for simple syntactic upgrades.  (For 
DocBook's original time, it made a ton of sense.)

	Eve

Jon Bosak wrote:
> | Bill, note this: In Closing Plenary we discussed (Jon brought up)
> | that when making a Major change, that will affect backward
> | compatibility, that instead of making it in the next Major
> | release, you announce the change will be made in the next Major
> | release.  So this means you actually go through 2 Major releases,
> | the second being where the change actually takes place.
> 
> I was describing the policy adopted by Davenport for DocBook (as
> well as I could remember it).  The policy was that if you are at
> version (N-1).M and you want to make a backwards-incompatible
> change then you don't get to make that change in N.0 but just get
> to announce in release N.0 that the feature will be changed in
> version (N+1).0.
> 
> I wasn't urging this, just noting it as something to consider.
> Somewhere along the line we might want to ask the opinions of the
> co-maintainers of that specification back then:  Eve Maler and
> Eduardo Gutentag.
> 
> Jon

-- 
Eve Maler                                        +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems                            cell +1 781 354 9441
Web Technologies and Standards               eve.maler @ sun.com