[Zope3-dev] Re: egg version numbers and zope releases

[Benji York]

Jim Fulton wrote:
> - IMO, backward incompatibility, and therefore, deprecation, is no- 
> longer an option.

While I don't disagree, I would like to brainstorm approaches to 
handling non-backward-compatibility.  One approach that's been proposed 
is that when you have a package z3c.foo and you need to make a 
backward-incompatible change you'd create, essentially, a new package 
z3c.foo2.  I like the simplicity of that, but it does offend my sense of 
aesthetics a bit.

Another option would be that the major version number indicates 
incompatibility.  Therefore, z3c.foo 1.x would be incompatible with any 
2.y.  One downside to that is that I don't think setup_tools handles 
version numbers that way, so would be glad to provide a 2.0 version if 
you're not careful enough to say version < 2.0 when 2.0 doesn't yet 
exist, messing up your dependencies when 2.0 is introduced.

Thoughts?
--
Benji York
Senior Software Engineer
Zope Corporation