[L2Ork-dev] Getting ready for GSoC coding to begin

[Jonathan Wilkes]

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 3:44 AM Albert Graef <aggraef at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 8:00 AM Albert Graef <aggraef at gmail.com> wrote:

>

Albert Graef via disis.music.vt.edu

3:44 AM (8 hours ago)


to l2ork-dev
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 8:00 AM Albert Graef <aggraef at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> While we're at it, there's yet another problem: I doubt that rev. 779f31dc entirely fixes the issue reported in #299.

> [...]

> Heck, apparently even Miller decided to fix this at some point, and he usually rejects *anything* which breaks backward compatibility in vanilla.

This was always an l2ork branch of code IIRC:

1. Ico added the bang method to pd-l2ork
2. I wrote Ico about the ambiguity wrt "symbol bang", added an issue,
and labeled the issue "good-first-bug"
3. Zack fixed that bug to get some practice submitting a merge request

So as I understand semantic versioning:

1. Ico added a feature: minor version bump
2. I took away that feature: major version bump

Someone who has used Purr Data for years can then look at the major bump
from 2 to 3 and take care updating given that there's a breaking change.

I guess I'm using semantic versioning to communication information about
pd-l2ork changes, and you're using it to communicate information about Vanilla
compatibility.

Not sure what the path forward is, but does all this sound correct so far?

-Jonathan