Proposed updates to Java product versioning policy

[Cantor, Scott]

On 6/1/15, 10:32 AM, "dev on behalf of Ian Young" <dev-bounces at shibboleth.net on behalf of ian at iay.org.uk> wrote:
>I understand that if we have no trust that a dependent library really follows semantic versioning then we can't make that guarantee. If we really believed that likely, though, we wouldn't let patch versions of a dependent library into our minor versions either.

Generally most projects are less sanguine about removal than adding or changing things, but that's just my impression.

>We are stricter, though, at present. That's not unjustifiable, and we do now have a stated rationale for it. I'm just interested in exploring whether we can actually apply the same criteria to *some* other dependencies where we might have some trust.

Well, Spring's the obvious one given that it's totally impossible to really review it case by case, it's too big. I also think plugins tend not to have that much exposure to Spring outside of the parsing code, which doesn't change that much.

-- Scott