Issue 3: What criteria/steps/policies must releases after the First Major Release adhere to?
Approved Resolution 3 (TSC 09/05/2019):
All major releases must fulfill the same requirements as those for the First Major Release, in accordance with SemVer.
All releases (both major and minor) should document how an upgrade can be deployed.
For major releases where there is a breaking change or minor releases that add new functionality, documentation to migrate from the previous minor version of the previous major version should be provided.
Comments
Some of these seem too strong and contradictory. Backwards compatibility and justification for breaking changes? I'd rather not touch this issue.
Some kind of release notes and security analysis would be a nice requirement for major releases though.
What I meant was "Backward compatibility if possible" otherwise "justification" and clear upgrade directions. I will make this clear
Adherence to SemVer. Clear upgrade directions. Backward compatibility if possible, else justification and upgrade directions (hopefully using tooling) for breaking changes. Release notes and adherence to Release criteria (set earlier) like Dan says below
Maybe we just have one "Major Release" criteria that is applied to all major releases from the first to the nth.
Vipin Bharathan
Proposed/Draft Resolution 3:
Backward compatibility, adherence to SemVer. Clear upgrade directions. Justification for breaking changes. Release notes (this seems obvious, but what is obvious to me may not be obvious to all)