Next Release of Fairlearn (v0.5.1 vs 0.6.0)

[riedgar-ms]

As mentioned in the community call, I think that we should do another release of Fairlearn. Back in #659, we were talking about doing monthly releases, and we're now coming up on three since the last one. I have a PR (#686 ) out to update the Changes doc, since some things got missed.

I don't think there are any major changes which could be merged imminently, so I don't think there's a particular reason for further delay. The one potential one is the change of master to main. However, I'd suggest that we do this release, then rename the branch, officially check in the governance docs, and release 0.6.0 then.

Thoughts? @hildeweerts @adrinjalali @romanlutz @MiroDudik @mmadaio

[romanlutz]

I'm in favor of 0.6.0 since we have a new module (preprocessing).

I agree on waiting with master -> main until this is done to avoid interrupting the release pipeline. As soon as you do the release I can take care of the master -> main switch.

What is the second release in your sequence?

[MiroDudik]

I think we should do release now -- I would lean towards 0.5.1, but I don't care too much.

There are no clean-cut semantic versioning rules for 0.y.z, but we have been approximately following this:

• breaking changes: increment y
• non-breaking changes: suffices to increment z

So the next obvious breaking change is going to be when the widget goes away.

When we update the governance and put it in .RST, I think we should bump up z, just so that the website is accurately reflecting the current governance. [Edited: I just noticed the suggestion to recuse ourselves... I'll stay recused!]

[adrinjalali]

I'd say if we're adding at least one new feature, it should be 0.6 and not 0.5.1, since the latter implies mere fixes IMO.

As for the governance change, I think we should just include it in whatever release comes after the change, w/o taking the governance change into account in the release schedule.

[riedgar-ms]

Given the various votes and non-votes, I think the consensus is for v0.6.0 (since the new release will have the correlation remover) and no extra release for the governance change?

[MiroDudik]

Sounds good to me.

[adrinjalali]

I'd say the change in the governance is effective whenever we merge PRs related to them. From the users' perspective, governance doesn't change anything in the library, and therefor shouldn't change the version number alone.