Hi all,

It's in the mood: GTK, Gnome, Linux are bumping their major version
numbers. Should we follow the same path?

Several reasons why I think this is a good idea:
- we have a major feature coming: signature checks
- we have a major API breakage: the pmhandle_t thing, the signature check
level thing
- throughout the 3.x development cycle, a lot of
incompatibilities/changes have happened:
* database have no longer the separate "depends" file
* sync DBs are now a single tarball
* packages have an "epoch" field not understood by previous versions
* packages can be xz-compressed
* PKGBUILDs have epoch, check() and checkdepends
* force is not accepted anymore by makepkg

If the next pacman version were to be 3.6, it would have very little
similarities with pacman 3.0. They don't seem to be forward-compatible,
neither are they backward-compatible.

So maybe it's time to go pacman 4.0 ?

Cheers,
Rémy.

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Rémy Oudompheng <remy@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It's in the mood: GTK, Gnome, Linux are bumping their major version
> numbers. Should we follow the same path?

> - we have a major API breakage: the pmhandle_t thing, the signature check
> *level thing
This has never been the case. People just seem to finally be
building things to it now.

But yeah, I was already going to call the next one 4.0, I didn't think
it was even worth bringing up here. Allan and I had this brief
conversation in IM yesterday as well which is quite the coincidence.

-Dan