-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 101
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
Why don't you choose to introduce BC breaks with BOX 4.4.0 #1065
Comments
Hi @llaville, which BC issue did you run into? The very vast majority of the changes released are quite internal so it should not affect you. |
Well, after update my https://github.com/llaville/box-manifest project, I was able to run the Just a reminder, because BOX Manifest live is last days. About BC issue, even if you marked is as private now, Such kind of changes, is for me a BC break and need a MAJOR version when you follows semantic versioning rules. When you've doubt about next version to apply on a project, I suggest you to give a try on this cool tool that help on decisions => https://github.com/tomzx/php-semver-checker |
Ha I see. My mistake this class was definitely meant to be private I forgot about that change (it was a few months ago...). If it is the only problem though it is one I can fix with ease.
That is entirely fair. It's really not an easy thing to do especially for 1. a tool like Box 2. a project like this one where most of the core is a private API, since at least for now most it is really more meant to be used as a black box distributed tool rather than a library.
I had no doubt about it :) If there was any BC break it was a mistake. I do have in mind Box5 but it will be more things than internal refactoring stuff. |
For BOX v5, I recommand you to think about a new architecture based around two projects :
|
It's definitely been in the back of my mind, same for PHP-Scoper, but not certain it makes it to v5. There is still quite a few moving pieces. Also need to weight in a mono-repo approach, a kinda like it is done with the requirement checker. But they all are relatively expensive changes, and I think there is higher priority ones such as #580. |
Hello @theofidry
I'm sorry to said that, but I was first happy to see the new release 4.4.0 after months, and now I'm sad to see so BC breaks.
I regret that you don't follows semantic versioning and choose 4.4.0 rather than 5.0.0 with such changes !
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: