Skip to content

DNX Runtime releases and SemVer #1068

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

Closed
tugberkugurlu opened this issue Nov 11, 2015 · 4 comments
Closed

DNX Runtime releases and SemVer #1068

tugberkugurlu opened this issue Nov 11, 2015 · 4 comments
Labels

Comments

@tugberkugurlu
Copy link
Contributor

Are DNX Runtime packages going to apply SemVer? What I am trying to understand is this: when I rely on DNX runtime 1.0.0 for my library or application, can I assume that it will always work on any runtime releases whose major version is 1 and may not work for any with major version of 2 or higher?

@Eilon
Copy link
Contributor

Eilon commented Nov 11, 2015

SemVer agrees with the first part of your statement, but not the second.

SemVer says that as long as you stay within 1.x, there will be no breaking changes.

SemVer says that when 1.x changes to 2.x, there are breaking changes. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that a particular library won't work on 2.x. If the library just uses string or int then it is quite safe to assume no breaking changes would happen in that part of the system.

@Eilon Eilon added the question label Nov 11, 2015
@tugberkugurlu
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Eilon thanks! Yes, true but you cannot assume that your library written against 1.x will work on runtime 2.x. So, my questions is: what is the plan for DNX runtimes? Is SemVer is going to be applied for them as it's explained here? Can I always assume that my app/library will survive upgrades within the same major version?

@Eilon
Copy link
Contributor

Eilon commented Nov 12, 2015

The idea is to apply SemVer to all packages. So yes, you can safely assume that.

@tugberkugurlu
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Eilon thx!

SteveSandersonMS pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 27, 2018
This changes the bind lowering pass to be more tolerant of unexpected
and invalid content.
@ghost ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 4, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants