Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Bump version to 0.3.20 for publishing
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
@fkling
fkling committed Apr 24, 2016
1 parent 5c5573c commit d07ac8e
Showing 1 changed file with 1 addition and 1 deletion.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion package.json
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
{
"name": "jscodeshift",
"version": "0.3.19",
"version": "0.3.20",
"description": "A toolkit for JavaScript codemods",
"repository": {
"type": "git",
Expand Down

7 comments on commit d07ac8e

@Daniel15
Copy link
Member

@Daniel15 Daniel15 commented on d07ac8e Apr 27, 2016 •
edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Perhaps this should have been a minor bump (0.4) since there's a new public API (the testUtils), so it's not purely a bugfix release.

@fkling
Copy link
Contributor Author

@fkling fkling commented on d07ac8e Apr 27, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When < 1.0.0, the patch number is increased for new features and bugfixes. The minor version is only increased for breaking changes.

Of course we can also consider to make jscodeshift 1.0 ;)

@Daniel15
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When < 1.0.0, the patch number is increased for new features and bugfixes

Ahh, that's something I wasn't aware of. Thanks for the info!

Of course we can also consider to make jscodeshift 1.0 ;)

We could follow React's lead and make the next version jscodeshift 4 rather than 0.4 😛

@fkling
Copy link
Contributor Author

@fkling fkling commented on d07ac8e Apr 27, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We could follow React's lead and make the next version jscodeshift 4 rather than 0.4 😛

If you feel strongly about this, sure ;)

Ahh, that's something I wasn't aware of. Thanks for the info!

Actually, it seems I'm not quite correct: http://semver.org/#spec-item-4

Major version zero (0.y.z) is for initial development. Anything may change at any time. The public API should not be considered stable.

But what I mentioned before is the pattern I follow. So yeah, we could also have done 0.4.0.

@fkling
Copy link
Contributor Author

@fkling fkling commented on d07ac8e Apr 27, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Once thing I forgot: Not sure if it makes sense to use a major version > 0 if recast itself is 0.x. Maybe @benjamn wants to finally release a major version too? ;)

@benjamn
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure! I think this ast-types issue is the biggest to-do in the way of a recast/ast-types 1.0: benjamn/ast-types#57

@Daniel15
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If you feel strongly about this, sure ;)

4.0 would be a bit silly, but I tend to avoid 1.0 releases if I've had 0.x releases for a long period of time, as it makes people think it's the very first version. I normally skip from 0.x directly to 2.0 if 0.x is relatively stable and there's lots of major changes or refactoring.

Please sign in to comment.